I think Guardian needs a better understanding of the delegate system (or to stop pushing a disingenuous agenda dressed up as balanced). Bernie has about 1040 pledged delegates, Hillary about 1290. The super delegates have never overridden the decision of the voters. Hypothetically, they could. However, the practicalities of a few hundred lobbyists and union leaders trying to impose a leader on a nation of over 300 million (with Trump as the only other option) would mark the end of the Democratic Party. If the majority elected Sanders and the party establishment handed it to Hillary, there would be a mass exodus from the party. Its base would drop to under 10% of registered voters. Hillary, who is detested by independents, would never win - 40% of Bernie supporters wouldn't even vote for her if she won the nomination 'fairly'.

The super delegates are used as a threat, primarily for disinformation tactics like those in this article. When you factor them in (particularly with no explanation!) they are demoralising. At this stage, that is the only purpose for including them in the total. Hillary has an actual lead of 250 - if Bernie continues to win by the margins he has in the last 8 primaries, he will overtake her.

or someone who would love Sanders to win, you seem deeply committed to Hillary's only remaining campaign strategy: hopeless inevitability. You missed the glaring misconception that the article factors in super delegates with no explanation. If the party used a few hundred lobbyists and union leaders to override the electorate, the party would be over. 40% of Bernie supporters wouldn't even vote for Clinton if she did win the nomination. The constant foregrounding of 'demographics' is frankly racist, with Clinton taking a monolithic 'black vote' for granted with a sense of entitlement that will backfire. There is a huge progressive political movement underway in the east coast inner cities, and these voters have little in common with the conservative Democratic establishment in the South - regardless of race.

Sanders is not 'way down' in the polls, even if they are accurate. The latest in California has him down by 6%. Beneath all the talk of demographics and caucuses and whatever else it is that makes every Bernie win illegitimate, the Clinton campaign is well aware of a very real and very devastating trend: the more exposure voters have to Bernie's message, the more defect to his side. New York is going disastrously for Clinton, and California is two months away, with almost 500 delegates at stake, and every risk of providing a monumental Bernie win.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/09/bernie-sanders-wins-wyoming-seventh-state-unstoppable-new-york-primary-next

Bernie Sanders just won his seventh straight victory. Is he unstoppable?

By Diane Francis


Bernie Sanders galloped to a decisive win in cowboy land, the Wyoming caucus. His momentum is impressive and, at this point, it feels like he’s unstoppable. He has come out of nowhere since January with a hard-hitting, liberal message that resonates dramatically with Democrats and independents.

Wyoming marks his seventh victory in a row (and eighth out of nine), giving him 1,068 delegates to Hillary Clinton’s total of 1,755. The nomination will go to whoever wins 2,383 delegates. He won 56% to 44%, and picked up seven delegates.

With her trajectory downward and his on the rise, anything can happen – especially now that their race to the nomination veers back to the east.

New York will be the first of six populous eastern seaboard states with primaries that have a total of 753 delegates to split. He needs to win these decisively to gain in the count vis-a-vis Clinton.

But if Sanders wins New York, all bets are off in terms of the final outcome, because this would humiliate and rock the Clinton campaign. She served as senator there and has made the state her home.

Sanders, on the other hand, was born and raised in New York City, but established his career in Vermont, where he has had a lengthy and successful political career as mayor, congressman and senator.

Perhaps it’s because of the high stakes that a new tone has been set in the two-way race in New York. Sanders claimed Clinton was “unqualified” for the job, due to her war chest from Wall Street and her support for the Iraq war, among other policies. Since then, his campaign spokesman has backed off somewhat.

What has Clinton supporters worried about New York is that, setting aside the scuffling between the two over their suitability as president, Sanders is closing the gap in the polls. His pattern during this election cycle has been to come from behind and win. And the New York polling gap has narrowed in recent days to roughly 10%, which is why this race will be a big test for Clinton.

Sanders has done this in the past seven primaries, eventually crossing the finish line ahead of her.