gut feeling.

If you push up someone no one is rooting for. It gives them that Mitt Romney I'm gonna win feeling. Then when the important time comes, you have 4-8 years to figure that out only way to blunt it is to vote for more Bernie like dems for congress

1. It is a closed primary. Voters had to be Democrats or change their party affiliation to Democratic in order to vote. I'm not sure on the deadline for doing so. Clinton has excelled in closed primaries where only Democrats can vote.

2. The state has almost a month of early voting. Hillary has excelled in states with long early voting periods as her extensive ground team gets out the vote intensely during the early voting periods.

Alleged fraud had nothing to do with Sanders losing AZ by the margin he did.

that is what happened. He should have gone there earlier but he had to go to the contests in the East first. The MSM and the ptb were all involved in his loss in many of the states.

I was just pointing out this coincidence.

You're attempting to draw a correlation between fraud and a Sanders loss by suggesting a pattern exists.

I'm not saying there was no fraud in AZ; but the election in Maricopa, by far the biggest county in the state, was run entirely by Republican officials. If there was fraud, they were responsible.

That being said, fraud is not the reason a state is lost by 20+ points. Fraud may account for a few points, but not 20 or more.

I was just saying that those states that had complaints of voter fraud in 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012 had Clinton win by 20% or more. It was just an observation not an accusation.

1. There have been only 2 states before tonight that had fully closed primaries, FL and LA. LA was because of AA and FL was partially.

2. This seems logical, I think it has more to do with early voters not even having a chance to learn about Bernie.

Who tend to vote for her.

Bernie is the only one who wants to raise social security.

They know Hillary as she has been around for 25+ years. Most voters have only been aware of Bernie for a year or so. I don't think policy positions matter to these voters.

according to the 2013 census at least. Roughly the same % of pop over 65 as many other states.

not really alleged, it's happening.. and if it's widespread yes I could assume so. But again it's a conservative state. Hillary is well lets say Purple. So not really surprise there. UT and ID are in play because of Donald. They aren't voting for him. And most are giving independents this year zero interest which isn't very smart imho

1% in and they are already calling it for her

Either something is off or NYT is far behind.

Now that we really need him?

He used to go all over the world to monitor elections in third world countries. It has long looked to me as if he is desperately needed here.

As usual.

Tiresome.

in states that allow early voting far ahead and without excuse. In this case name recognition plays a crucial role. In early voting, people vote before Bernie start ads. and ground work etc.. Clinton is already well known.

Check this article.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/sanders-currently-winning-democratic-primary-race-ill-prove-to-you_b_9528076.html