It is, in fact, south of Canada, after all. So is Michigan, by the way. Every state Hillary wins is a "Southern" state!

northward march.

I am looking forward to carrying my red state vote for our regional candidate (Who only wins red states).

Uff da!

Yay for the Electoral College: the absurd, anti-democratic anachronism that makes some animals more equal than others!

We're talking delegates to the Democratic Convention, not electors. That's a different matter, which we can address at general election time.

Were it not for the Electoral College and the U.S. Senate, states like those would have almost no representation at all. A visit to Wikipedia would probably help explain all that, I think.

Don't like it? Put me on Ignore.

And you are, of course, dead wrong about the EC effect on small non-swing states...despite your inane, condescending suggestion to consult Wikipedia. Try and think it through...

I'm good with that:

Current popular vote in the Democratic primary elections:

Clinton, Hillary Diane Rodham 4,263,516 59.80%
Sanders, Bernard "Bernie" 2,745,545 38.51%

Source: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/D

If the popular vote of the people, in a one-day national primary and the GE, doesn't elect the candidate I prefer, so be it. That's democracy. What we have now ain't democracy.

It would be far too costly to enter such a primary race. Many things that sound good aren't.

I don't think the extended primary season is what's driven Bernie's excellent fundraising. No reason he couldn't have used much the same fundraising appeals throughout the "debate season" that would lead up to a July national primary.

... the state where he finds the delegates he needs. It's pretty clear to me that Hillary is now the PROHIBITIVE leader in this race. It's doubtful to me that he'll EVER get enough delegates to catch up with her. In my opinion Bernie WILL NOT be the nominee.

Go, Hillary! We love you!

I mean, sure...she's a carpetbagger, not really a real New Yorker, but she was their Senator (for a bit).

NYC

and he's running out of places to get them.

Sid

He's not "running out of places." It just requires a complete shift in campaign strategy, which, unfortunately, isn't happening. The campaign must accept that to catch up it must win large delegate states, and with a significant lead. But I think that rather than accept this the campaign (ie, Weaver, to keep getting paid) wants to just keep the thing going and not focus where, while unlikely as can be, they can catch up.

This means a concerted and focused effort on NY, CA, etc. Put it all in those states. Take a truly Sanders style position, be honest about the math, and say, "This is where we are going to stand our ground."

But Weaver and the advisers don't care about that, they just want to keep getting paid, imo. Without an effort like that it goes from highly unlikely to extremely utterly impossible. And I say this as a Sanders supporter. It's all but over, unfortunately.

How can your home state only support you by 20?

So, Bernie's right next door. That explains it, I'm sure.

Big-ass lake, too.

here in NY I expect no less

everyone was saying Bernie wouldn't make it this far to go to NY. MMWWWHHHAAAAA!!!!!