But, would Hillary being doing so well if she hadnt already had the superdelegates?
Also cant they change their minds?
AFAIK, yes they can change their minds and yes she would still be winning.
Yes, Democratic superdelegates are not officially pledged to any particular candidate, though many have gone on record as stating that they will vote for Clinton. They can change their minds, though. As the 2008 primaries wore on a number of them did exactly that, switching their support from Clinton to Obama while the outcome was at least technically in doubt. (Sorry, no cite for that. Too lazy to look it up.)
Thing is that Sanders is not the 2008 version of Obama. He has to give superdelegates a reason to renounce their stated support for Clinton this time around, and he basically has not been able to do that.
(It’s probably fair to add that until quite recently, he hasn’t tried very hard to do this, in fact the opposite: he has preferred to run as an outsider without a lot of support within the political “establishment,” and that means deliberately **not **courting the favor of a lot of elected officials. Now that it’s clear that he is suffering as a consequence, he and his supporters are beginning to try to change some minds.)
According to the Democratic Delegate Selection Plans that I have seen, a superdelegate must specify his/her candidate choice no later than 10 days after that state’s normal delegate selection process ends. Keep in mind that, even for the early states, this is usually no earlier than April, since, while the number that each candidate gets is known, the delegates themselves are not chosen until much later.
This tweet indicates exit poll results very favorable to Hillary Clinton, and also indicative of Democrats being much less into this “outsider” zeitgeist.
Hillary wins Georgia and Virginia, Sanders wins Vermont (no shock)
Bernie Sanders’ supporters being even more obnoxious than usual on social media, especially Twitter. Whining about Georgia and Virginia being called for Clinton, ignoring that Vermont was called for Sanders the second the polls closed.
A bunch of Democratic voters in Georgia complained that they were given Republican ballots and then, after being told that the mistake could be fixed, were informed that they had been already recorded as having voted.
Just saw Bernie’s victory speech in Vermont. I’ll still call him fantastic no matter what happens today. (I’m a HRC supporter) He’s an incredible career politician. Maybe if Hillary takes him as her VP, we’d see a huge (not “yuuuuge”) turnout from the 18-25 crowd, but I doubt that’ll happen too.
Democrats, in general, do not view the government as an enemy. We tend to view it as us, and whatever problems it has can be fixed by us.
I’ve been amazed for decades that Republicans can run for office–and win!–on a “drown the government in the bathtub” platform when government is a feature, a fixture, in every human society that has ever existed.
Because what Democrats won’t admit is that a lot of the government is beyond the reach of voters, and they designed it that way. Plus Democratic voters don’t hold Democratic Presidents responsible for the failures of the government under their watch. So how do you punish government failure if the only elected guy isn’t accountable for it?
So yeah, that’s why the anti-government message works. In order for the “government is us” argument to work, the government has to be placed firmly under voter control, and that means Democrats booting Presidents who experience a lot of bureaucratic failures.
Oh, and Sanders wins Vermont! Sanders wins Vermont!
Hillary wins American Samoa 162-61. That’s not precents or districts or anything, but the actual number of votes.
There will be a Democratic presidential debate March 6 in Flint, Michigan, and another March 9 in Miami. No way Sanders drops out before taking those last two chances to get his message out.
And that’s worth 11 delegates? That’s some BS right there.
Thought it was our FFs who designed it that way.
10 I think. It is kinda disproportionate, it would almost make sense for the campaigns to just pay thirty staffers to move to the island for a year.
But then, they do get shafted not being able to vote in actual federal elections, so I’ll allow it.
I’m talking about the federal bureaucracy. It only has a single elected official, and Democrats generally do not hold him responsible for its failures. That means it is beyond democratic accountability.
[bold added]
The bolded analysis comes from a misunderstanding of the map and schedule. Bernie pretty much has to stay in it until the states where he has more support come up in the calendar.
The current Democratic Party primary process is not designed to designate a winner in the opening rounds. And Bernie is polling much worse (10-20 points down) in some Super Tuesday states than in national polls (about 5 points down and gaining), which implies that he is already ahead in states that don’t have state polls yet. And Bernie’s trendline of support is likely to cross hers very soon, if he stays on message & keeps plugging away.
Hillary can store up delegates today, but she needs that cushion to even survive to the convention.
This is going to be a long, painful fight, whichever side you are on.
Bullshit. You’ve been pushing this meme for a while, and I just don’t buy it. Democrats will tend to support Democratic candidates over Republican candidates, but they will absolutely consider different Democratic candidates if there is a trend of administrative failures. This isn’t particularly different from Republican voters in this respect.