Let the 1% completely own us and our planet.

You have to give Hillary credit, when she sold out, she sold out completely. She is owned by the lobbyist of every single sector we are trying to fix, finance, insurance, war being the biggest. And all that Fracking she's supported as well as the Keystone XL can only lead back to the Koches.

I won't ask you to google. I've come to know that doesn't happen with people supporting that woman.

You're right, tick tick, our planet is a climate change time bomb.

A vote for Hillary is a vote for war, famine, pestilence and death.

Well, according to DU anyway. The truth is that what gets posted on DU is of no consequence whatsoever in the real world.

So divide that 287 by 10.

Before getting too excited, let's remember that 10 days can be an eternity in politics.

10 days ago, we still had a conservative majority on the Supreme Court for example. I wouldn't be surprised if something comes up between now and then. Maybe it will change the trajectory of the race, maybe not. But don't count your chickens before they hatch.

Last edited Mon Feb 22, 2016, 02:03 AM - Edit history (3)

You should because they'll have gotten their candidate in.

She's even bought by off shore drilling.

Ain't her super pacs awesome! More MONEY for Hillary!
"Through its fund, Franklin Square invests in private fracking and oil drilling companies across the nation, as well as Canada and the Gulf of Mexico. This includes heavy investment in Pennsylvania frackers."

It'll still likely be very close besides Vermont, and she looks to have big leads in the states with the most delegates. The math does not look good for him, if things stay the way they are right now.

The nomination will not be decided on number of states won.

And the race will not be over on March 2.

I likey.

The (mostly red) states that vote on Super Tuesday are more favorable to Clinton than are those that vote in April.

The (mostly blue) states that vote in April are more favorable to Sanders than are those that vote on Super Tuesday.

Those April states have, by my quick count, 794 delegates.

My predictions:
1. On Super Tuesday, Clinton will win more delegates than Sanders.
2. Sanders will nevertheless win some states.
3. On March 2, the Hillary Clinton Group will be full of whooping and hollering and declarations that the race is now effectively over and that Sanders should withdraw and that if he doesn't it's an absolute scandal and proof positive that his objective all along was to torpedo the Democratic Party.
4. Sanders will ignore the whooping and hollering and, in the April contests, will win more delegates than does Clinton.

If we take "blue state" to mean a state that's part of the Blue Wall -- the states that have voted for the Democratic nominee in each of the last six presidential elections -- then Sanders will probably win all the blue states that vote on Super Tuesday. Unfortunately for him, there are only three of them (Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Vermont). Clinton will probably win the rest of Super Tuesday, although, to my surprise, I've seen polls suggesting that Oklahoma (of all places) might be close.

The blue states that vote in April are Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin. Clinton will presumably win New York, but Sanders will get some delegates even there, plus enough delegates elsewhere to outpoint Clinton among pledged delegates from that septet of states.

The main point of my post was my advance response to the impending March 2 declarations by Clinton supporters that the race is over. They will be putting too much emphasis on the happenstance of the calendar that loads up Super Tuesday with her stronger states.

The race will not be over March 2, but Clinton will still be the favorite, because the rest of March looks good for her. The remaining Southern states vote, along with several other states that neither she nor Sanders will have any hope of carrying in November. I expect Clinton to have a big lead in pledged delegates by the end of March, a lead that Sanders will erode but not erase in April.

I further predict that, to the (extremely vocal) dismay of the Clinton supporters, Sanders will not suspend his campaign. He'll want to continue to raise his issues. That was his main purpose in entering the race in the first place; I don't think he expected to be tied in pledged delegates at this point, or to be anywhere near where he is in the national polling. In June he can expect to do well in California. He might even win it, but at a minimum he'll get a lot of his supporters elected as delegates.

If Clinton supporters predict, as just about all of them seem to, that Clinton will breeze to victory and that Sanders doesn't have the remotest chance of winning, then their logical course would be to start the post-primary reconciliation process now -- but my final fearless prediction is that many of them won't. Specifically, I predict that the abrasive attitude of some Clinton supporters after Super Tuesday will tip a small number of Sanders supporters over the edge, swinging them from "hold my nose and vote for a corporatist war hawk Democrat in November" to voting for Jill Stein or writing in Elizabeth Warren or what have you. I personally don't think it's rational to ding a candidate based on how his or her supporters act (and I'm in the "hold my nose" camp myself). Nevertheless, we've seen comments to that effect from Clinton supporters and from Sanders supporters. Fortunately, the people on each side who think that way are overrepresented on DU and are a very tiny fraction of the whole electorate.

It's not ALL about delegate math. The April contests aren't being decided today, they will be decided in the context of what the "narrative" of the race is at that time. Hillary will have likely have significant momentum at that time, and Bernie will be facing headwinds. This may have the effect of stifling some of the enthusiasm that has been fueling his campaign.

This of course comes with the caveat that a week is a lifetime in politics, so we don't really know anything.

There are quite a few Democrats who would prefer a Sanders presidency, but who'll vote for Clinton because they think she's more electable. If, coming out of March, she has what's clearly an insurmountable lead, some of those people will feel free to vote their real preferences. To them, the best outcome will be a Clinton nomination but with a strong showing by Sanders to send Clinton the message that she should be more progressive. If they perceive that Clinton has it wrapped up, they can send that message by voting for Sanders.