Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Lucinda

(31,170 posts)
35. No. It means that person will be the presumptive nominee.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:59 PM
Apr 2016

There will be no contested convention. Once Bernie cannot possibly get more votes than Hillary from any combination of delegates, it will be over. And the supers will not be shifting.

Is this your first election?


You are correct... pkdu Apr 2016 #1
No, you're not correct... SidDithers Apr 2016 #2
You are incorrect. You make some assumptions which are not certain. morningfog Apr 2016 #6
And superdelegates will do nothing more than be a rubber stamp... SidDithers Apr 2016 #14
Barring something earth shattering, yes. Supers are either irrelevant or undemocratic and should morningfog Apr 2016 #32
The supers vote with their states Stuckinthebush Apr 2016 #16
Best line ever! northernsouthern Apr 2016 #51
No Stuckinthebush Apr 2016 #64
Oh, I see. northernsouthern Apr 2016 #67
Never said any of that Stuckinthebush Apr 2016 #68
If you are serious northernsouthern Apr 2016 #69
I'm ok with the supers, yes Stuckinthebush Apr 2016 #71
I do think they are bought off. northernsouthern Apr 2016 #72
Well....no, they aren't "bought off" Stuckinthebush Apr 2016 #73
Sadly many of them. northernsouthern Apr 2016 #75
Wrong. they have to hit 2383 (I believe thats the correct number) Unicorn Apr 2016 #15
Nope. Once one of them reaches 2026 it is mathematically impossible Lucinda Apr 2016 #33
Which means at that point it goes to open convention. Unicorn Apr 2016 #34
No. It means that person will be the presumptive nominee. Lucinda Apr 2016 #35
No. Just first one this close. Unicorn Apr 2016 #36
The 2008 primary between Obama and Clinton was closer, much closer SFnomad Apr 2016 #37
Thanks for pointing that out. I don't rememer how the election 8 years ago went Unicorn Apr 2016 #39
This isn't close at all. Hillary has a huge lead, and with proportional delegates in every state Lucinda Apr 2016 #41
Incorrect TMontoya Apr 2016 #3
Oh? Did the DOJ and FBI end their investigations? CentralCoaster Apr 2016 #17
Yes it is TMontoya Apr 2016 #21
Since when? Yes, there are requirements. Unicorn Apr 2016 #20
.... MADem Apr 2016 #4
You are incorrect hack89 Apr 2016 #5
You are incorrect about 2008. Hillary conceded and still a third of the supers stuck with her. morningfog Apr 2016 #10
Hillary moved to stop the roll call and nominate Obama by acclamation. hack89 Apr 2016 #25
Probably. morningfog Apr 2016 #27
I know he will. He is a good Democrat. nt hack89 Apr 2016 #29
That was such a great moment at the 2008 Convention obamanut2012 Apr 2016 #58
She needs 175% of the remaining delegates, and Sanders needs just one delegate. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #7
LOL livetohike Apr 2016 #13
the key number is 2026 pledged delegates, not 2383 geek tragedy Apr 2016 #8
Bullshit. 2,026 is NOT the number needed to win. That is dead wrong. morningfog Apr 2016 #11
okay, then when Clinton passes 2383 including her superdelegates geek tragedy Apr 2016 #19
2,383 is the number. She likely won't hit that until the supers vote at the convention. morningfog Apr 2016 #26
I get that you recognize the reality of the situation. geek tragedy Apr 2016 #30
Automatic delegates do not vote separately. LiberalFighter Apr 2016 #42
2383 is the number that includes pledged and super delegates. You know that. stopbush Apr 2016 #78
Exactly right. yardwork Apr 2016 #60
Quite screwy. jcgoldie Apr 2016 #9
Receiving enough earned delegates to win nomination outright will be difficult for her. pa28 Apr 2016 #12
Every delegate is earned Stuckinthebush Apr 2016 #18
Not quite, or not in the same ways. Orsino Apr 2016 #74
Sanders will not contest the nomination if he loses the voting. geek tragedy Apr 2016 #22
^^^^^^^^^^^ pdsimdars Apr 2016 #40
which means, by your definition, 2008 was an "open" convention onenote Apr 2016 #66
Not my definition. That is the definition and it doesn't happen very often. pa28 Apr 2016 #70
Hillary needs 67% of remaining pledged delegates to secure 2,383 through PDs alone. morningfog Apr 2016 #23
this is an accurate statement. nt geek tragedy Apr 2016 #24
thanks all boomer55 Apr 2016 #28
Hillary has 1930 delegates including everything. She needs around 459 more. Renew Deal Apr 2016 #31
I don't think that' exactly true. She needs those delegate to go from a plurality to a majority. HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #38
VIII. Procedural Rules of the 2016 Democratic National Convention LiberalFighter Apr 2016 #43
I think they can make a motion to suspend the rules HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #45
Highly unlikely to change that aspect. LiberalFighter Apr 2016 #46
Define who could be the delegates in "of the delegates voting" HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #47
She needs the majority of all delegates present at the the convention. LiberalFighter Apr 2016 #44
No you are not correct Demsrule86 Apr 2016 #48
If he truly loves this country he'll stay in boomer55 Apr 2016 #49
I vote for screwy math cemaphonic Apr 2016 #50
You are correct. TM99 Apr 2016 #52
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2016 #53
What does it matter? TM99 Apr 2016 #55
After PA and MD it will be less. nt Jitter65 Apr 2016 #54
No that is simply false Gothmog Apr 2016 #56
You left out a few words... Thor_MN Apr 2016 #57
Here's the easiest way to visualize the primary delegates... Sancho Apr 2016 #59
Your title is a bit misleading. Adrahil Apr 2016 #61
Not correct. Agschmid Apr 2016 #62
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2016 #63
No, you're not correct. You are applying #BernieMath. nt LexVegas Apr 2016 #65
Careful...basic math doesn't go over well here nt UMTerp01 Apr 2016 #76
Basic math shows that a majority of pledged deletes is 2026. The higher number that Bernie people pnwmom Apr 2016 #77
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Am I correct that Hillary...»Reply #35