Of course one also hears the argument that Iowa and New Hampshire being first is to give outsized power to Northern lily-White. There is little question that if the first states were more representative of the Democratic party as a whole, even of the United States as a whole, that Sanders would not have even gotten out of the gate.
Given that the primary schedule is mostly the same for both parties it seems likely that such manipulations are improbable in either case.
I do not have a date, but I do have that partial prediction, and I’ll stand by that much.
There aren’t that many delegates at stake in Iowa and New Hampshire. If these states were representative of the Democratic leaning electorate as a whole, not just registered Democrats then the race would be considered neck and neck right now.
These manipulations aren’t improbable, they are absolutely intentional, how do you think all those states ended up with a primary on the same day, or why Iowa and New Hampshire insist on going before all the rest?
This. Even if he loses (and yesterday was not good) I want him to walk in with 46%+ of the delegates, say, “This is the party base you need to win, for future reference,” and make it clear that this is where things are going in the future, whatever happens in the fall.
There will be more college subsidies, there will be single-payer, there will continue to be a revolt against killer cops and the nominally Democratic pols who protect them, and we will get a financial transactions tax. And maybe Hillary can be primaried from the left in four years. [ETA: You know, assuming if she’d have a chance at it instead of/after being pasted by Trump]
In future elections, the “conservative brown people” and “only here for feminism” factions can jump off the train if they don’t like it.
because we like murder & terrorism? :eek:
not on everyone. And his tax rates are in line with JFK’s/Ike’s/Truman’s. But if you prefer a permanent budget deficit like pre-Euro Greece, OK! :rolleyes:
Meh. Are we the United States of Borrowing Money to Send to Likud? Just call him a self-loathing Jew next, because apparently you want to.
That Mondale speech is the greatest piece of responsible, fiscally sound, even fiscally conservative statesmanship in sound bite form I have ever seen in my life. If you mean to say that Bernie is a responsible grownup–good! I agree. If you mean to say that Americans want someone who will lie about money, hire assassins, murder the heads of our allies’ governments, prioritize Israeli defense purchases over his own people, run huge deficits, and generally promise the moon for $19.95–over a grownup? OK, I think if you’re right, you might just turn the entire country into a recruiting video for al Qaeda.
Grr, argh…
I see what you did there.
Largely it’s Republicans behind setting the dates the Super Tuesday southern states in question. 
Their legislatures are Republican dominated and states set their own dates within the rules of both parties (so they can avoid the cost of two election days.) Both sides of the aisle carve out the four Feb states. Both have penalties related to going earlier than allowed for the other states. Both offer states potential rewardsfor going later.
The rewards for going later are good for non-establishment candidates. It helps fight the urge of states to front load…a little. Someone without establishment support (and money) would have an even tougher road if the whole contest was done on a month. The carve out states help non-establishment candidates too. It’s a slow start that lets those without a lot of cash conduct retail politics and find an electorate that might never hear of them otherwise. Even the clustering benefit isn’t bad for non-establishment candidates in general. It reduces travel costs and time letting them spend more time on ground. That’s good for candidates without establishment financial support. The Southern states actually left a lot of Democratic delegates off the table by going before they get lateness or clustering delegate bonuses.
Oh and that last link shows the collusion among the southern states. It was led by the Georgia Secretary of State…who’s a Republican. The southern states that chose Tuesday have Republican dominated legislatures. It’s hard to blame establishment Democrats for southern Republicans who controlled scheduling.
Certainly. This is the first time I can think of where a Democrat has used it to advantage, though it is a fairly new system.
No there are not too many delegates at stake; but the race out of the gate is not delegates, it is about momentum. Sanders performance in those states was consistent with losing any “average” state, handily, and an underdog losing all of the first states would kill a campaign right off.
It “would be considered neck and neck right now”?? How the HECK do you come to that conclusion?
As far as the history of primaries … it is actually an interesting history. Before WW2 it was all party bosses deciding the candidates. The modern era really began after 1968, when Humphrey became the nominee without being in a single primary, many believed thanks to Richard Daly’s machinations. It was a pretty disastrous affair.
Multiple commissions took on reforming the process for the party. Yes, there was intentional reservation of power for party leaders, hence “superdelegates.”
Each state decides when they hold their primary within a wide range (the issues with Michigan and Florida in 2008 duly notes). The Southern states holding a large earlish regional primary as Super Tuesday dates to 1988; my understanding has been that the hope had been to increase their influence. And yes, as noted, since the states decide, and the states are Red, it is the GOP establishment that might conceivably hold sway, not the Democratic side.
:smack: jeez, right over my head. close enough to part my hair.
You left out the option I was looking for: “never, but he won’t win the nomination”. So I chose June 7 as the closest.
Or get indicted.
Keep dreaming.
This. Sanders did not get into this with great confidence of winning. The real point of his campaign is to start a movement that will keep going after November, and no available bully-pulpit can be passed up.
I can’t be bothered to do the math or predict each primary result, but Sanders is not going to drop out until Hillary has over 50% of the committed delegates required to secure the nomination. At that point he’ll thank his supports, endorse Hillary, and challenge her and the DNC to listen to the voices that he inspired and incorporate a version of their concerns into the party platform. And they’ll move on with their tried and true practice of money-soaked, corporate-led, poll-driven politics as usual.
Yeah, where’s the ‘July 25th, at the convention’ option? That’s what I expect - Sanders will concede and endorse Clinton on the first evening of the convention.
Me too.
He can, but I’m not sure I see the point after she has the required delegates. If Sanders supporters no longer have any threat of denying her the nomination, she has no reason not to switch to fighting for the general.
Without that threat, I’m not sure how his candidacy has any more pull than other forms of advocation.
The point would be getting his message out. And Sanders has found out that a lot more people are hearing his message when he delivers it as part of a presidential campaign.
If the press stops covering, he can quit. But I think they’ll stick around for a while yet. Reporters love the horse race aspect and they don’t want to call it over. So they’ll continue to play up Sanders as a contender as long as possible.
Why is it dreaming?
The stuff leaking out of FBI is not sexy but it is starting to look indictable.
Me three.