2016 Postmortem

lmbradford

(517 posts) Wed Apr 20, 2016, 11:48 PM Apr 2016

239 Delegates

That is the amount we need to make up according to Green Papers. That number doesn't include the 10 or so delegates that have yet to be awarded from Washington. I cannot believe all the naysayers and Berniecrats who have been down in the dumps today. I thought it would be so much worse. Its a wonderful day to be a Dem for Bernie. Lets get back on the phones and get out and move the next few states on Tuesday. There are 300 delegates up for grabs. If we can score big wins, we can cut the deficit to half. Lets do this!!!

btw, we were farther behind at this point with President Obama. I know because I was there!!! and right here on DU with all the calls to drop out just in the same way. FIGHT!!!

18 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

239 Delegates (Original Post) lmbradford Apr 2016 OP

Cutting the deficit to half MFM008 Apr 2016 #1

What purpose does it serve to say things like "get in the medication line?" Punkingal Apr 2016 #8

FYI, someone alerted on this... Dr Hobbitstein Apr 2016 #13

Good call, Jury! NurseJackie Apr 2016 #16

At no point was Obama ever that far behind Clinton. Codeine Apr 2016 #2

Care to calculate that again? brooklynite Apr 2016 #3

This graphic demonstrates that Obama was never Codeine Apr 2016 #4

Just because you can misstate the facts, doesn't mean the rest of us have to play along mythology Apr 2016 #5

Here is the issue. The Democratic primaries, unlike the republican primaries are proportional. still_one Apr 2016 #6

Green Papers still didn't notice that Bernie got a 5th Mississippi delegate jfern Apr 2016 #7

Link?... SidDithers Apr 2016 #11

Here's their tweet that Bernie did get a delegate in the 3rd district jfern Apr 2016 #14

Still not correcting your misinformed and counterfactual statement? nt Codeine Apr 2016 #9

"btw, we were farther behind at this point with President Obama" LexVegas Apr 2016 #10

It seems to me the primary schedule was different in 2008. Waiting For Everyman Apr 2016 #12

To cut the deficit to half (by 120 delegates), next Tuesday... SidDithers Apr 2016 #15

Still standing behind your lie? nt Codeine Apr 2016 #17

Obama was never in the hole. He had a considerable lead at this point. Zynx Apr 2016 #18

MFM008

(19,814 posts)

1. Cutting the deficit to half

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:01 AM

Apr 2016

is still half a loss.
Math, do it.
She will win at least 4 out of 6, probably win all of them.
He may win any caucus states if any.
Then he has to try to intimidate delegates and super delegates which he SWORE he would not do.
I don't mind a fighting spirit, but there comes a time you have to get in the medication line.

Punkingal

(9,522 posts)

8. What purpose does it serve to say things like "get in the medication line?"

Reply to MFM008 (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:43 AM

Apr 2016

Dr Hobbitstein

(6,568 posts)

13. FYI, someone alerted on this...

Reply to MFM008 (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:34 AM

Apr 2016

On Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:23 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Cutting the deficit to half
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1798630

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

"get in the medication line" is a personal attack

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:31 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No, it's not a personal attack.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not worthy of an alert, let alone a hide.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)

16. Good call, Jury!

Reply to Dr Hobbitstein (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:12 PM

Apr 2016

Codeine

(25,586 posts)

2. At no point was Obama ever that far behind Clinton.

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:08 AM

Apr 2016

And certainly not late in the contest. By the last handful of states Obama held a steady lead that Clinton could not winnow down even as she won a fairly decent string of primaries.

brooklynite

(94,581 posts)

3. Care to calculate that again?

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:08 AM

Apr 2016

The Democratic Convention has total of 4,765 delegates votes with 2,383 needed to nominate.

Soft delegate count changed from Clinton 1,787, Sanders 1,137, O'Malley 1 to Clinton 1,924 (+137), Sanders 1,245 (+108), O'Malley 1.

Hard delegate count changed from Clinton 1,223, Sanders 944, Uncommitted 714 to Clinton 1,362 (+139), Sanders 1,052 (+108), Uncommitted 714.

California: Soft count changed from Clinton 49 to Clinton 48 (-1).

New York: Soft count changed from Clinton 40, Sanders 0 to Clinton 178 (+138), Sanders 108 (+108). Hard count changed from Uncommitted 44, Clinton 0, Sanders 0 to Clinton 139 (+139), Sanders 108 (+108), Uncommitted 44.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com

Codeine

(25,586 posts)

4. This graphic demonstrates that Obama was never

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:17 AM

Apr 2016

significantly behind Clinton in the delegate race.

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=480

mythology

(9,527 posts)

5. Just because you can misstate the facts, doesn't mean the rest of us have to play along

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:22 AM

Apr 2016

As others have noted, Obama was never this far back and Obama had a much more viable coalition than Sanders does.

still_one

(92,194 posts)

6. Here is the issue. The Democratic primaries, unlike the republican primaries are proportional.

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:40 AM

Apr 2016

now while 239 delegates doesn't sound like much, in order for Bernie to surpass Hillary in delegate count he will need to garner at least 60% of all the remaining pledged delegates to win now.

Slightly winning the remaining states is not good enough, he needs to win them by enough votes to garner a net gain

Sanders needs 60% of all remaining pledged delegates to win now.

There are 19 primaries left. 3 are caucus states, 16 are primaries, and the majority are closed.

Maryland, Connecticut, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island are the primaries coming up next week, and they are closed with Hillary appearing ahead in the polls. There are 384 delegates at stake in those primaries, and the odds are that Hillary will have a net gain of delegates when those primaries are finished.

So now we are left with 14 primaries.

California has 475 delegates, New Jersey has 126

The way delegates are proportionally allocated, Sanders needs about 2 out of every 3 votes in all remaining contests to win.

That is extremely unlikely.

As for the Super Delegates, the candidate that has the most pledged delegates, is the one who will get those

jfern

(5,204 posts)

7. Green Papers still didn't notice that Bernie got a 5th Mississippi delegate

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:41 AM

Apr 2016

Probably out of date on other states too

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)

11. Link?...

Reply to jfern (Reply #7)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:15 AM

Apr 2016

I'm not seeing that Bernie picked up a Mississippi delegate anywhere.

And don't link to Seth Abramson.

Sid

jfern

(5,204 posts)

14. Here's their tweet that Bernie did get a delegate in the 3rd district

Reply to SidDithers (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:48 PM

Apr 2016

Green Papers says he didn't.

https://twitter.com/msdemocrats/status/721470840710127617

Codeine

(25,586 posts)

9. Still not correcting your misinformed and counterfactual statement? nt

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:12 AM

Apr 2016

LexVegas

(6,067 posts)

10. "btw, we were farther behind at this point with President Obama"

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:13 AM

Apr 2016

Waiting For Everyman

(9,385 posts)

12. It seems to me the primary schedule was different in 2008.

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:32 AM

Apr 2016

Yet when comparisons are made, no one mentions that. I wonder why?

Thanks for a great post, lmbradford! I agree. FIGHT!

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)

15. To cut the deficit to half (by 120 delegates), next Tuesday...

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:43 PM

Apr 2016

Sanders would have to take 252 out of the 384 delegates up for grabs.

He'd have to win CT, PA, MD, DE and RI by a combined 65-35.

He's trailing in PA by 27 points
He's trailing in MD by 34 points
He's trailing in CT by 15 points
He's trailing in DE by 7 points
He's trailing in RI by 9 points

You really think he's going to win each of those primaries by 30 points?

Sid

Codeine

(25,586 posts)

17. Still standing behind your lie? nt

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:14 PM

Apr 2016

Zynx

(21,328 posts)

18. Obama was never in the hole. He had a considerable lead at this point.

Reply to lmbradford (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:16 PM

Apr 2016

You don't know what you're talking about. I was there, too, and you're not remembering this right.

Reply to this discussion