Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks! But with the debate and his pope visit coming in the last few days, things may still change though I think Hillary should definitely get at least 54% of the votes.
I wonder when Sanders supporters will finally accept reality? I'm guess it will be after the April 26 primaries. Just losing NY probably won't do it, but if he loses anywhere nearly as badly as expected in MD and PA, will reality finally sink in for most of them?
There are actually quite a few Sanders supporters here in Western NY - primarily because Hillary did nothing for the area but is taking credit for anything that has been positive. Bernie's rallies are filled. I've received calls from them already - not a peep from the Hillary campaign.
OT, but what happens if Sanders gets 2026 in pledged delegates and has more than Hollary and Hillary doesn't, but Hillary is leading with super delegates. Will the nomination go to Hillary because of her lead in super delegates, or will there be no convention and Sanders would be the nominee?
OT, but what happens if Sanders gets 2026 in pledged delegates and has more than Hollary and Hillary doesn't, but Hillary is leading with super delegates. Will the nomination go to Hillary because of her lead in super delegates, or will there be no convention and Sanders would be the nominee?
The superdelegates have always gone along with the candidate who wins the pledged delegates - which is what makes Bernie's argument that the super delegates should switch to him both absurd and hypocritical. Hillary is leading by well over 200 pledged delegates - while that's lower than the highest lead she ever held, which was over 300 pledged delegate, her current lead is still over twice as much as the highest pledged delegate lead Obama EVER held in 2008. And the supers switched over to him.
In addition, the Sanders campaign is spreading a very false narrative that a candidate needs 2383 PLEDGED delegates in order to not have a "contested" convention. No candidate has ever been held to obtaining 50% of total delegates solely from pledged delegates. While I feel absolutely certain the superdelegates see through this charade, unfortunately, his supporters do not.
The superdelegates have always gone along with the candidate who wins the pledged delegates - which is what makes Bernie's argument that the super delegates should switch to him both absurd and hypocritical. Hillary is leading by well over 200 pledged delegates - while that's lower than the highest lead she ever held, which was over 300 pledged delegate, her current lead is still over twice as much as the highest pledged delegate lead Obama EVER held in 2008. And the supers switched over to him.
In addition, the Sanders campaign is spreading a very false narrative that a candidate needs 2383 PLEDGED delegates in order to not have a "contested" convention. No candidate has ever been held to obtaining 50% of total delegates solely from pledged delegates. While I feel absolutely certain the superdelegates see through this charade, unfortunately, his supporters do not.
If she does not win the majority of pledged delegates then, strictly speaking, it is a contested convention in that the party superdelegates will huddle and determine the winner. Having said that, Clinton will have a large majority of both pledged delegates and votes by then and any effort to give the nomination to Sanders would certainly be going against the will of the people. So, it's not happening. Sanders people need to get their heads around the idea that he is going to come up way short. Maybe they will see that after the east coast swing.
If she does not win the majority of pledged delegates then, strictly speaking, it is a contested convention in that the party superdelegates will huddle and determine the winner. Having said that, Clinton will have a large majority of both pledged delegates and votes by then and any effort to give the nomination to Sanders would certainly be going against the will of the people. So, it's not happening. Sanders people need to get their heads around the idea that he is going to come up way short. Maybe they will see that after the east coast swing.
I agree that the actual vote totals will reflect a combination of both pledged and super delegates. But that's the norm - it's never been the case that someone has tried to claim that you need a mathematical majority that comes from the total of ALL the delegates but that comes only from pledged delegates. It's recognized at that point that if you get a majority of pledged delegates, as Hillary is very much on track to do, the most likely and reasonable outcome will be that the superdelegates, particularly those who have already endorsed that candidate, will in fact ratify the will of the people by supporting that candidate.
Bernie's approach is rooted in trying to diminish the value of the votes of those who voted against him, and to say that the superdelegates should ignore what is the clear will of the voting public as measured by both pledged delegates and popular votes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
