I hate to break it to you, but neither of these people are youngsters.

few media interviews in between.

Hillary? What does she do all day? Gives a speech now and then & has dinners where people pay to hear her speak.

Bernie is the energizer bunny. Amazing for a 74 year old man.

..throw out all the early voting and Hillary is in a bit of trouble. Also, without the establishment , corporate media trying to end this..it is closer than people think.. This is not over yet.

GOTV with early voting and good campaign management...so early votes count for less?

It is fundamentally over.

Sanders shouldn't drop out, but to suggest he has anot actual chance is ludicrous.

While all the rest are like lumbering elephants.

by 15 % from last month and Hillary's are up. Seems the movement has peaked and is dropping. Google.

Really?

Bernie was launched from the likes of Kennedy space center.

The elephants are republican like who while maybe nice to look at, can't be lived with unless one trains them.

Bernie's ascension is amazing and a true American success story that people will look back on and marvel at. His opponents will be seen as flat-earthers who would have been those who said we'd never make it to the moon.

by calling for the other campaign to quit 1/2 way through. Dig?

most of the super delegates are part of
the establishment. Just as an example:
my Senator is one, and he was one of
the 13, who voted for fast track.

with the Clinton Machine.

Bernie was basically unknown in September. Meanwhile Hillary has been well known for 25 years, and has built relationships during that time.

It's really not that hard to understand.
Even he said he had no idea when he started that that he would have this much support.

By "early" voters I mean early primaries and early voting in states like AZ (or wherever that is allowed).

Sanders did not have a lot of money early on. He had to win some primaries to get his unprecedented small donor-only fundraising off the ground. Advertising takes a lot of $$, and advertising early--say, in states with early voting--takes a luxury of $$, which he didn't have at first.

Ergo, ignorance was the Clinton campaign's friend, and they got themselves a lot of votes in states with early voting BEFORE these voters knew that there is a good alternative, or even knew Sanders' name. And now that these voters know that Sanders is not only a good alternative to the Goldman Sachs candidate, he is a knock 'em dead FDR New Dealer with a spotless record vs the corruption that Clinton represents; he's running a spotless campaign (no superpacs, no corporate, bankster, billionaire $$$); his trustworthy poll numbers are stratospheric (while Clinton's are in the toilet), and in every national poll over the past few months, and recently, he beats Trump by much bigger margins than Clinton does (recent poll put him 20 pts over Trump nationally) and furthermore beats all Republicans (while Clinton loses to some of them).

You find all this out after you've voted for Clinton--after the local Dem party has come to your door with a false ballot showing only Clinton as the candidate, urging you to vote early (which has been reported)--and you could feel pretty damn pissed off. A pollster calls and asks who you support and you might well say Sanders even if you'd voted for Clinton--because you might well now regret your vote for Clinton.

Quite frankly, I can't think of any other explanation for Sanders now tying Clinton in national DEMOCRATIC voter polls. (Sanders 49%, Clinton 48%--a statistical tie). This was unthinkable a few months ago, even by Bernie supporters. We all figured name recognition was a huge disadvantage to Sanders and he would have to do quite a lot to overcome it. Well, he seems to have done that to a great extent, although I think it's still a factor even in a high-information, high-computer/social media use state like CA.

The Seth Abramson article* that was posted here yesterday analyzed how this worked in AZ. It explains, for one thing, how AZ called the primary for Clinton with only 1% of the precincts reporting (which was very weird). It also explains the big discrepancy between early voters and same-day voters, Clinton vs Sanders. He says it wasn't because early voters were older Dems, but because Clinton advertised early, with her $$$ haul from the banksters, et al, and got to the early voters before they knew about (or knew much about) the alternative, Sanders. I tend to think it was both. Early voters and mail-in voters do tend to be older Dems.

On top of this, the Puke Establishment in AZ was heavily into vote suppression--which the Clinton campaign and, goddammit the DNC, damn well knew and did nothing about. Result: With their early voters (many of them deceived) in the bag, they let the likely Sanders voters stand in 4-5 hour lines, at the end of which lifelong Democrats were told they are Republicans and couldn't vote in the Dem primary, and many other likely Sanders voters were turned away because of 'mistakes' made by the private contractor that the Pukes had hired to do the registration rolls, and/or had to leave for their jobs or to care for their kids, or did manage to vote but had to suffer heavily for it.

I think the next states' voters really need to heed this information:

1: Sanders thrashes Trump (& beats all Republicans), as shown in numerous national polls. Clinton doesn't do nearly as well. Sanders is a much better candidate for the GE. This is partly because Sanders is running a very clean campaign and doesn't have Clinton's "baggage" and partly because his New Deal-like message really resonates with the 99%. Americans are finding out about these things, now, and polls are starting to reflect this among Democrats, including Sanders now tying Clinton in a national Dem matchup.


2: The next states' voters also need to be very wary of Democrats at their door, urging early voting and deceiving them that there is no other candidate, or, if the potential voter asks about Sanders, telling them that he doesn't have a chance or lying that he's dropped out, or whatever.

----------------------------

*http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0206257/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm