Bernie supporters how do you explain his relatively weak performance in Oregon?

[BootinUp]

2008 Oregon Primary
Obama 58.52%
Clinton 40.50%

2016 Oregon Primary (est. % in: 83%)
Sanders 55.1%
Clinton 44.9%

[ciaobaby]

1. How about explaining her weak performance in Kentucky ??????

[BootinUp]

3. Why deflect? Looking for honest answers to the OP. nt

[Ned_Devine]

26. I wouldn't call winning nearly every county in a closed primary "weak"

All except for Gilliam County, which he lost by one vote 101-100. Seems like a pretty strong night to me. That's my answer

[BootinUp]

82. So from the standpoint that this is a message campaign,

its a pretty strong night, but it can't be spun as a sign of going on to win the nomination correct?

[Ned_Devine]

91. It's a sign that...

...the candidate who was hand picked by the party and has had a pretty nice schedule as far as debates, primary sequence, endorsements from party bosses up and down and all over, is having a tough go at sealing the deal against a 74 year old democratic socialist from Vermont who has no establishment endorsements, superpac or favorable media coverage. The fact that he's won as much as he has and continues to do so at such a late stage in the game when someone with her pedigree as a SOS, 2 term senator and wife of a former POTUS should have sewn it up already speaks volumes. That's how I see it.

I try not to play the nasty name calling games or fight provoke here. I just call it like that. He's doing very well with a big chunk of voters and if he'd gotten even half the preferential treatment from the party and the media that HRC has, it would be a different story. I'm a 41 liberal and part of the working poor and Bernie speaks to me and lots of people like me. HRC just doesn't and I don't trust her. I remember the steady racist campaign she ran against Barack in 2008 and I don't think anything has changed. Her team is the "win at all costs" type and it's exactly what I hate about politics.

Will he get the nomination? I'd love it. Who knows? She is under a federal investigation regardless of how much everyone wants to say that it's a RW attack.

[BootinUp]

93. I never had an issue with his message until his campaign started spinning reality

into another universe. I think his message would be stronger if he didn't raise a ton of doubts about being truthful. It will only make it easy for him to be caricatured. If Oregon only gave him 10 points in a largely uncontested state this thing is over.

At this point I see some danger signs that we could have a weakened party in November. But its not too late for him to start being more realistic about the race, and tone down the hot rhetoric.

The part about racism in 2008 is not worth much mention in my opinion as HRC has good ties with people of color.

[Iliyah]

4. KY was a win win. HRC reached her target and then some.

In OR, BS missed his target and his % for PD has increased for the worse. I'll say HRC won the night.

[ciaobaby]

9. HRC wins the night ??? - Hillary wins when she loses just cause...

[Iliyah]

12. LOL, alrighty then

Nevertheless, HRC wins the night.

[Jitter65]

5. That's easy. She is a woman NOT running against a black male. Period! nt

[ciaobaby]

7. AHA - when all else fails pull out the woman card.....

[Adrahil]

31. She slightly overperformed demographically in KY....

and Sanders slightly underperformed the demographics in OR. In short, the performance of both candidates is consistent with Clinton being about 10 points ahead nationally. Of course, based on the NEED TO WIN numbers, Sanders had a devastating night.

[Buzz cook]

96. She was expected to lose Kentucky.

That's what polling indicated. So winning instead is not a weak performance.

[virtualobserver]

2. I think that Bernie's numbers will be similar once the ballots are counted

[dinkytron]

6. Everyone was stoned from the night before and forgot to vote.

[imagine2015]

8. LOL Bernie only carried 55% of the vote in a closed primary. Pretty good I'd say.

Hillary is suppose to win by huge margins all closed primaries where independent are not allowed to vote.

So what happened in Oregon and Kentucky BootinUp?

[BootinUp]

10. I am concerned Bernie's path to the nomination is looking grimmer every day, aren't you?

[imagine2015]

21. No. That's the political line of the corporate media and Democratic Party official who support HC

It's now obvious Secretary Clinton will fall several hundred pledged delegates short of what she needs to capture the Democratic Party nomination. She and her supporters did not expect this.

The unpledged super delegates will decide who the Democratic Party will run for President.

They have two months to decide.

If they decide to nominate Clinton that will pave the way for Trump's election.

[Adrahil]

33. So, you advocate the Super D's overturning the will of the voters?

She will be WAY ahead in pledged delegates at the convention. Short of the indictment fairy coming, there is NO FUCKING WAY the Super-D's push Bernie ahead, especially the way he's been acting today.

Heck, Sanders just lost one of his Super Delegates.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-05-17/sanders-quest-for-superdelegates-loses-one-after-virgin-island-official-flips-to-clinton

[imagine2015]

102. The system was rigged to favor Hillary, and she still can not capture the nomination!

And even under those rules and rigged primary system she was unable to win enough elected delegates to capture the nomination.

Under the Democratic Party rules, which Hillary supports, it is now up to the unpledged super delegates to decide what candidate to nominate.

I didn't know you were opposed to these nomination rules.

How have you expressed your objection to the rules?

[Adrahil]

106. Yes I have. I support eliminating supers and going to closed primaries.

But thanks for verifying my suspicions.

[imagine2015]

108. I'm for ending super delegates and opening up elections while you want to restrict voters.

That's too bad.

And if you really want those restrictions why not go all the way and only permit registered Democrats to vote for Democratic candidate for Congress and President?

And why stop there .... don't let people who voted for Bernie in a primary vote for Hillary in the general election and what the hell, ban registered independents from voting for any Democrats period! How bout that?

And maybe require some proof of membership in either the Democratic or Republican parties. That's the ticket.

And let's call that democracy.

You do realize that registered Democrats and registered Republican are becoming a shrinking minority of voters. Right?

[WhiteTara]

77. Too bad his SDs are leaving him

to vote for Hillary.

[imagine2015]

104. We don't know how any of the super delegates will actually vote.

None of them are pledged or required to vote for Bernie or Secretary Clinton.

They are all free agents.

In fact, they are not even required under convention rules to vote for anyone on the 1st or later ballots.

And more than 150 super delegates have not even indicated a preference for either Secretary Clinton or Senator Sanders.

So don't count your chickens before they hatch!

We don't know what will happen over the next two months that could end Clinton's second attempt to win the nomination.

Over 200 super delegates abandoned her in 2008 and that could happen again.

[timmymoff]

23. well if you are concerned you should probably send him a $2700

donation.

[frylock]

85. You're cute.

[John Poet]

11. How do you explain Hillary's VERY weak performance in Kentucky,

a state which should have favored her demographically?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. The bland leading the bland.

[BootinUp]

15. So deflection is all you have? Pretty sure everyone said KY favored Bernie. nt

[John Poet]

17. I never thought Kentucky would favor Bernie.

[Garrett78]

87. Why not?

It fits the profile of a Sanders state.

[Adrahil]

34. Nope... slightly favors Sanders.

[penumbra]

14. Maybe they are too busy moving to Oregon

and just vote on name recognition?

It's a nice place to live. But with all the influx of folks not accustomed to "Oregon nice", we'll probably have to shore up our election process against "shenanigans".

It is, for now, a closed primary, so you really can't use your usual tactic of blaming Trump voters, because, you know, they really want Sanders to win.

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. Winning any primry after the media calls ones opponent the almost certain nominee is impressive

Once the public is largely convinced, rightly or wrongly, that a contest is essentially over - the person deemed on the losing end begins to fade. That is what typically happens. Continuing to wrack up victories after the race has already been "called" for the other side goes against the grain and shows continuing strength, not weakness. The only thing surprising is that Hillary is still having so much trouble beating back Bernie in so many states after becoming the "all but inevitable" nominee.

[BootinUp]

20. The same situation existed in 2008. Obama was called the winner for long time

prior to the Oregon primary.

I am merely pointing out that Bernie is losing steam and he's ignoring the reality.

[jeff47]

57. Which lead to the large victory you cite in the OP.

So why'd Clinton massively fail in the same situation?

[BootinUp]

66. I will concede that Oregon voters that decided to vote perfer Bernie, what I am not seeing

is anything close to an indication that Bernie can win the nomination since he needed a much bigger win. All the railing against the Party has created an interesting dynamic but still a losing one.

[jeff47]

95. Your view is too short.

It became obvious that Sanders only had a "winning Powerball"-like chance of securing the nomination a while ago.

But the thing is we aren't voting for Sanders. We're voting to change the direction of the Democratic party. It took the DLC and its offspring about 30 years to get the party to its current, old-school Republican political position. It's going to take more than one election for us to reverse that.

The first step in that change is to break the conventional wisdom that only a conservative Democrat can possibly raise money and compete in elections. Sanders, while not doing well enough to win, has demonstrated that the DLC way is not the only way. If the conventional wisdom was true, he should have been annihilated long ago, instead of winning roughly half of the pledged delegates.

Another step is demonstrating that the party, its institutions and its candidates will have problems when they attempt to do the typical, smoke-filled-room machine politics. Incidents like the NV convention are part of that. Institutions like the NV Democratic party publicly destroying their credibility helps the goal of shifting the direction of the party, since those institutions are the primary barrier to policies that the public already wants.

We are turning the direction of the national party. That was never going to happen in a single election. Just like Goldwater lost but paved the way for the "Reagan Revolution", Sanders is paving the way for the (fill in the future president's name) Revolution.

Now, we could get it done much faster. But far too many people in the Democratic party are terrified of change. Those in power want to keep their money and power. Others are more interested in clinging to what they have for the relatively little time they have left. Those of us who are younger do not have that option. We will be alive to watch Miami be consumed by the ocean, so clinging to the status quo is not going to work for us.

[BootinUp]

97. Is it really though?

When Sanders himself becomes almost a caricature of Bagdhad Bob, and his supporters start looking a little like rioters, do you really think that is going to play well for the movements future growth? I guess we will see, because he shows no sign of really changing what he is doing. I predict we are going to see a greatly demoralized and diminished Bernie faction and many will not vote. I predict that if they were instead energized to vote for the Party in November we would have more strength to do the hard things that we all want.

[jeff47]

99. Yes, it is.

When Sanders himself becomes almost a caricature of Bagdhad Bob

To people who only get their information from TV news. AKA, those same people who just want to cling to the status quo a little longer.

They are now a minority of the population. That minority will continue to shrink as time takes its inevitable toll.

I predict we are going to see a greatly demoralized and diminished Bernie faction and many will not vote.

Again, you are still only thinking about one election. It is likely that turnout will be pretty bad - Clinton and Trump have the highest unfavorability of any presidential candidates. That's going to hurt turnout, whether or not Sanders supporters are happy.

I predict that if they were instead energized to vote for the Party in November we would have more strength to do the hard things that we all want.

When the party gets away with "who else you gonna vote for?", the party blocks any attempts at reform. There's no reason to reform when you can shit on everyone to the left of Eisenhower and still win.

[BootinUp]

100. Platforms are only compromised on when election wins are not big enough

or public opinion doesn't indicate support. That is exactly the lesson of the Reagan era, viewed from the right and the left with hard facts, instead of emotions.

[jeff47]

107. And again, you're still thinking about one election.

There will be elections beyond 2016.

Platforms are only compromised on when election wins are not big enough or public opinion doesn't indicate support.

You mean like when an "inevitable" candidate can only win roughly half of the pledged delegates against an old Socialist who has never received national attention before this primary?

Oh, he's also managing to more-or-less keep pace with her fundraising too, even without lavish high-ticket fundraisers.

That is exactly the lesson of the Reagan era, viewed from the right and the left with hard facts, instead of emotions.

And this "lesson" has lost us the most legislative seats in our party's history. How many more massive failures would you like to see before reconsidering this "lesson"?

[floppyboo]

98. 1000+ thanks for communicating so perfectly!

[AZ Progressive]

18. Goalpost moving! Polls earlier were giving Hillary a lead!

[NWCorona]

19. Obama came into the race with 20% support and without a media blackout

Bernie is doing very well all things considered.

[redstateblues]

81. Media blackout? What a joke. The media has kept Bernie propped up

for months-his wife was on every show until she stepped in it. The MSM loves to make it look like it's a horserace even tho it's been over for months. All about ratings

[NWCorona]

83. Please! you barely heard about Bernie in the beginning.

His air time was measured in seconds.

[Vinca]

22. I don't think his performance was weak.

You shouldn't compare the Obama election to anything else. It was a once-in-a-lifetime phenomenon which is unlikely to ever be repeated. And it sure as hell isn't being repeated by Hillary.

[Iliyah]

28. First women President of the United States of America?

Oh yea, another ground breaking phenomenon - LOL

GO HRC!!!!

[frylock]

88. First Democratic candidate under FBI investigation.

Just breaking down barriers left and right!

[BootinUp]

44. The path for Bernie called for a much bigger win, seems that this is further

proof it is all over except for the singing.

[frylock]

89. Lady Justice has a beautiful voice.

[timmymoff]

24. I explain it as a win.

Do you have many more questions I can answer? If so please bring them forth. I haven't all day I need to prepare for Hillary's Cotillion Ball.

[BootinUp]

25. It looks like another step towards defeat, didn't he need to win by like 66%?

[Smarmie Doofus]

29. LOL.

Stand-up.

You should be doing stand up. Seriously.

Eisenhower defeated Stevenson in the 1956 general election by 55-45 ; the history textbooks record it as a "landslide".

LANDSLIDE.

[BootinUp]

32. So you still think he can catch up in the delegate race?

[Smarmie Doofus]

40. Doesn't matter.

Sanders supporters generally aren't looking for government jobs or trying to elect the first member of a previously marginalized demographic.

We are trying to change the social and economic dynamics of the society as a whole.

No. Don't worry. I KNOW you don't get it.

[BootinUp]

47. So denying the state of the race is double plus good? nt

[phleshdef]

27. Double digit lead is weak?

[BootinUp]

35. A 10 point win is strong when he needed like 35 points?

[phleshdef]

39. In and of itself, as one state, it is. Thats all the OP was addressing.

[Adrahil]

36. He missed his delegate targets by a LOT. NT

[phleshdef]

38. That has nothing to do with the statement the OP made.

[Adrahil]

51. I don't agree....

Oregon was supposed to be where Bernie racked up major delegates and starts hitting those 65% targets he needed to get a majority of pledged delegates. His victory there was pretty weak given that, missing his targets by over 20 points. It's always a matter of perspective. Going in to yesterday, he needed about 65% of the remaining delegates. Now he needs about 68%. He's under-performing his targets.

[phleshdef]

59. Its not subject to an opinion.

The OP said a 10 point win was a poor performance. It is not, regardless of anything.

[Adrahil]

63. he said it was a weak performance. Relative to what he needed, it was. NT

[phleshdef]

68. No, the weak performance was in states that he lost by wide margins.

[KingFlorez]

30. Democrats don't like him

Enough independents switched in time to give him the win, but not enough to give him a landslide. Oregon shows that Democrats are not that impressed with Sanders.

[Bluenorthwest]

46. Hillary got fewer votes in Oregon this year than she did when losing in 2008.

Closed Primary. Heavily Democratic State. Wide margin of victory for Sanders, less Democratic votes for Hillary than her last Oregon routing.

Smearing Oregon Democrats is not wise. It's part of why she keeps losing here.

[KingFlorez]

48. She performed better by percentage than she did in 2008

And considering that the race is over for the most part, it isn't surprising that the vote totals are lower. I didn't smear anyone, I was just pointing out that Sanders doesn't perform that well with Democrats.

[azurnoir]

37. He won didn't he? but did Hillary's surrogates in the M$M go on 2 day smear spree against Obama

on the day preceding and day of the primary? Lot's of energy spent for very little result-such things used to be called "mouse milking"

[LonePirate]

43. Who pays attention to the M$M? Millennials sure don't.

It's hard to ague that the M$M's influence is massive when very few pay much attention to it.

[azurnoir]

45. But I'm told Hillary's age demographic does - but if that's true why were they preaching so loudly

to the choir?

[Tarc]

41. It's a shame that the Bernie DU'er who made the "Oregon by 70%!" claim is still FFR'ed

Otherwise I'd really like to know how Sanders fell to earth so hard in Oregon.

[Bluenorthwest]

42. How do you explain Hillary getting even fewer votes last night than she did in 2008 in Oregon?

Bernie won by a large margin in a closed primary, which her supporters previously claimed was impossible. Somehow she lost ground from 08 here. Why do you think that is the case? Where did her 08 voters vanish to? Donald?

[BootinUp]

54. Because we are just going through the motions in a race that's over? nt

[Bluenorthwest]

64. The race is not over until November, a candidate and cohort that is going through the motions

prior to even securing the nomination is putting the cart far ahead of the horse. The finish line is in November. And the race is not just for the White House. What sort of voters leave down ticket Democrats hanging because all they care about is the top line and they are just going through motions, not really taking part in the process or entire slate of candidates in the Party? How is that a thing to take pride in?

[Arugula Latte]

49. He won by 10 points. In a CLOSED primary.

"Bernie can't win closed primaries!" ... Wrong!

Hillary got her ass handed to her here. How embarrassing for the presumed nominee to do so poorly this late in the game.

[BootinUp]

50. So that's what his revolution is about, embarassing the party, not winning the nomination?

[Arugula Latte]

58. We are about fighting to help struggling Americans and taking action on global warming.

We are about moving the party back to where it should be -- serving people instead of corporations. You might not quite get how many millions of Americans are disgusted by the rightward DINO Clintonian push this party has been going through. We are showing that there is large opposition to the corporate Clinton-DWS corrupt way of running the party. We are sending a message. I'm middle aged, but Millennials aren't going to put up with this shit from the Democratic Party. Eventually they'll either succeed in changing its direction or they'll move on and vote for a different party.

[BootinUp]

73. A lot of Democrats including me are ok with his message, we now question the timing,

and the framing of the race and whether that makes any sense.

[Skwmom]

52. Since we can't be assured of the accuracy of the vote count, what's to explain?

[Bluenorthwest]

53. What were Hillary supporters predicting for Oregon?

Poll: Despite Bernie Sanders' Crowds, Hillary Clinton Ahead In Oregon--48-33
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511940218

"Oregon may not be Bernie territory after all
A new poll shows Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump headed toward primary victories next week in Oregon....Oregon is a closed primary so only Democrats allowed to vote in the Democratic primary. That appears to be Bernie's problem."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511948839


So they were predicting Hillary by 15 points because you know, closed primary! What happened? They had Math!!!! They said 'it's computer models!!!' What happened?

[BootinUp]

56. We were predicting that she will still win the nomination. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

61. No, the prediction was Hillary Clinton Ahead In Oregon--48-33

The reasons? Closed primary. What happened to all of that? Where was that 15 point lead that was being claimed all up and over DU?

Lots of this bullshit the last couple of weeks: "Oregon is a closed primary so only Democrats allowed to vote in the Democratic primary. That appears to be Bernie's problem."

So what happened? She lost a closed Primary by a very large margin. She got even fewer votes than she did in 08.

It's perfectly possible to predict she will win the nomination without spewing all that outlandish rhetoric about Oregon. In fact, how much stronger would such predictions look today if they had not been delivered along with all that very clearly incorrect prognostication and smearing of Democrats voting for Bernie?
Why indulge in all of that crap? What's the point?
"Hillary Clinton Ahead In Oregon--48-33"

[floriduck]

55. About like Hillary winning the state she routed Obama by 3 to 1 but only 2000 or so over Bernie.

Now THATS a sign of one miserably weak front runner.

[BootinUp]

60. KY was supposed to favor Bernie just like Oregon. I am just wondering when the revolution

is going to start. Bernie refuses to admit he can't win this nomination.

[Scootaloo]

62. Here's some other comparative numbers

In 2008, there were 868,371 registered Democratic voters in Oregon; 73.56% of them voted.

In 2016, there are evidently 2.2 million registered Democrats. Only 36% of them voted.

Despite more than doubling party registration, the number of people who actually voted was down by nearly seventy-seven thousand people from 2008.

What it looks like to me is that in 2008, the favored candidate in Oregon (Obama) was winning overall, and people were energized to come out and help him along that.

In 2016 though, the favored candidate (Sanders) has all but lost, and so that depressed Oregon voter turnout. He still won by ten percentage points, though.

Congratulations to Clinton for gaining on her 2008 Oregon performance by four points though.

[Bluenorthwest]

65. Dismal, horrific turnout. It's shameful.

But I think your analysis is correct.

[BootinUp]

67. Makes sense. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

69. Right, it was only an ass-kicking, and not a complete annihilation.

How you explain your weak but inevitable candidate?

[BootinUp]

71. So you are satisfied with the result?

I don't see how it helps him.

[lumberjack_jeff]

74. Me? Why does that matter? I find it vexing that the Clinton campaign is satisfied with the loss.

They're satisfied with the support of 50.1% of democrats + Wall Street Billions.

In the words of Steve Martin, "they don't need nothing else"

[BootinUp]

76. Can't speak for the Clinton campaign, but seems to me that

their eye should definitely be on the GE at this point. The primaries last night seem to confirm Sanders isn't going to get the turnaround he needed.

[pdsimdars]

70. Crap, ONLY double digits. Shameful. I think Hill won by a single vote in KY.

[BootinUp]

72. Wasn't the Sanders camp hoping for 30-40 points?

[pdsimdars]

110. Like EVERY other candidate in history, they were hoping for 100%

[Todays_Illusion]

75. I explain it this way. The third way have been growing in power in Oregon, ex: Ron Wyden

is a third way Democratic.

[BootinUp]

79. Ok, more pragmatic. I suppose that is very possible. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

78. Hillary's inevitable! She only lost by a margin of 3:2! n/t

[BootinUp]

80. So you can't spin this as a good sign for Bernie winning the nomination, correct?

[lumberjack_jeff]

101. Spinning? This is your thread, not mine. n/t

[KPN]

84. Weak? Lol!!!!

[BootinUp]

86. So the revolution is on the path, everything is ok in Bernieville?

[KPN]

90. Yawn!

You guys are going all out trying to push buttons this morning. It's fun to watch. And even funner to speculate why.

[bigbrother05]

92. So you're conceding that Bernie is the true successor to Obama?

Hillary lost by 18 to the front runner in 2008 and by 10 to the "also ran" in 2016.

Relatively weak applies to the Clinton camp in this cycle. We all hope they get their act together.

[BootinUp]

94. Speaking of acting, wouldn't you say that Bernie claiming a path to the nomination

is nothing but an act at this point?

[floppyboo]

103. where are you getting your #'s from. 2008 pledged delegates 49/51 for Obama

Polls had Obama up by 10. so, a 8 point loss btwn polls and results

I think you were looking at pledged and unpledged total.

2016- quite a different story!!!
Clinton was supposed to win by 15, and lost by 12 = a 27 point loss for Clinton.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries shows a breakdown of pledged/unpledged
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Democratic_primary_elections,_2008 shows the 10 most recent polls (I used 9, as one looks like a complete outlier) and just the combined PD and SD

Hope that helps

[pdsimdars]

105. Hillary supporters, explain this

.

[Warren DeMontague]

109. what happened to "Oregon may not be Bernie country, after all"?