Once the nominee is decided, there’s a desire among the electorate (if not always among the *nominees *
) to unite behind the winner. There’s an intellectual desire to help advance an agenda, and an emotional desire to be part of a winning team.
It will be interesting to see if Sanders can even break double digits in DC next week.
He just has to convince, somehow, almost all of the superdelegates that *he *really should be the nominee. He’s going to win over the first one any day now, you just watch.
Not so fast, he won Montana.
And North Dakota - a white caucus state - by a huge margin. Interestingly though, Clinton won South Dakota - which has very similar population demographics and similar concerns.
I was surprised that Bernie did that well in N. Dakota’s caucuses. The economy up there is heavily dependent on fracking.
Bernie did better in caucuses everywhere. It requires more of a time commitment than a primary, so it attracts the passionate and the young.
Yeah…NDak is a caucus (which has been Bernie’s forte the entire campaign) and SDak is a primary. It illustrates more the nondemocratic nature of caucuses than anything substantive about the candidates.
I’m not sure that even someone as politically active as I am if I would have bothered to go caucus for Hillary when I already know she’s won the nomination and there’s a huge soccer game that night.
By one estimation that I saw, HC is 98 delegates shy of clinching without counting Supers. DC only has 20, and she will get most of all of those, so she will still be a bit short. There are over 700 Supers. No one can be delusional enough to suggest that Bernie will get 90% of them. His supporter’s case to the Supers relied on him winning CA and NJ by huge numbers.
I think it’s closer to her needing 200 going by the green papers.
But yeah, Clinton still needs less than 1/3rd of the Supers to support her to win at this point.
I thought that was Nevada.
You’re correct. I suck at math. It is 198.
The Sacramento Bee this morning called the Republican primary for Trump with over 70% of the vote. But if you look at their county-by-county reporting Kasich actually won more votes. They said Kasich had a statewide total of 120,000 votes, but according to the county standings, he got 95,000 in Los Angeles County alone, so their numbers make no sense.
Where did those numbers come from? The official LA County registrar website shows Kasich getting 33,559 votes. So the 95,000 is what makes no sense.
[QUOTE=Los Angeles County Registrar]
Presidential Preference - REP
Candidate(s) Votes Percent
Donald Trump 179,130 69.85%
John R. Kasich 33,559 13.09%
Ted Cruz 30,775 12.00%
Ben Carson 9,691 3.78%
Jim Gilmore 3,300 1.29%
[/QUOTE]
Surprise, the Bee doesn’t know what they’re talking about.