Bernie Sanders wins Idaho Democratic presidential caucus
Source: Associated Press
Boise Bernie Sanders has won Idaho's Democratic presidential caucus which once again saw record breaking voter turnout even with its deep conservative stronghold.
Sanders and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton were vying for the state's 27 delegates to the party's national convention in Philadelphia this summer.
And while Idaho is one of the most conservative states in the nation, having not voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since Lyndon Johnson in 1964, Sanders actively courted voters in the Gem State in the days leading up to the caucus. He had campaign rallies in eastern Idaho as well as Boise.
President Barack Obama handily won the Democratic contest in Idaho over Clinton in 2008.
Read more: http://www.sltrib.com/home/3695729-155/bernie-sanders-wins-idaho-democratic-presidential
78% to 21%
Not even close.
tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)ForgoTheConsequence
(4,867 posts)Lorien
(31,935 posts)Unlike AZ.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)They called AZ before it even started and more voters were in line still than mailed in votes.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,867 posts)It's a caucus state.
pnwmom
(108,955 posts)So they didn't have to count a lot of precincts on election day to know she had won.
It wasn't declared with 2% of actual votes. But 2% of the precincts that voted on election day, in addition to all the mailed in voters, allowed them to declare the winner.
Lorien
(31,935 posts)with so many witnesses and so much photo evidence.
Idaho Falls:
ebayfool
(3,411 posts)pnwmom
(108,955 posts)Where are minority voters?
Based on the demographics, he was predicted to do well in this state. But it was a solid win, so congrats on that.
ebayfool
(3,411 posts)I don't see minorities in Clinton's photo, either. It's a huge crowd and shown at a distance. But then I'm not looking for a reason to pick at the photos.
I DO see well enough to recognize a backhanded congrats, though.
pnwmom
(108,955 posts)has few African American voters. Bernie will probably do very well here because of the demographics and because it's a caucus state open to Independents.
ebayfool
(3,411 posts)You know, the ones where you asked "Where are minority voters?". You come into the thread and immediately go there? Your point is obvious, I don't respond to baiting. All I said was Wowzers and stunning pix.
For pete's sake does everything have to be a fight around here? I don't go into Clinton 'happy, happy, we won!' threads and stir shit to denigrate their win. And that's exactly what's going on here - 'where's the minorities and demographics and caucus/independents'.
Why would passive/aggressive pissing on somebody's thread give you satisfaction? Really?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1387635
I looked in on a LBN thread about Clinton's AZ win and all I commented on was the advisability of mail-in ballots because of the mess be talked about in AZ's ballot today. Said Clinton prolly had people stuck in those long ass lines. And totally agreed with you that the ability to check your vote was a great idea.
I've seen some classy posts by Clinton supporters tonight saying congrats. They didn't qualify it with a "But ..." or anything else. They were awesome. Others could take a look and them and learn a thing or two.
Frank Cannon
(7,570 posts)There aren't a lot of people of color there, which--aside from the natural beauty of the state--is why the Aryan Nations and other assorted skinhead organizations like to call that state home.
I grew up in Idaho. I can count the number of African-Americans I went to public school with on half of one hand.
C Moon
(12,209 posts)dana_b
(11,546 posts)Duckfan
(1,268 posts)dana_b
(11,546 posts)chwaliszewski
(1,514 posts)davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)Our biggest chance to win this thing is in California. Hundreds of delegates, enough to make up quite a difference in the count. I am hoping that Bernie will cut down on Clinton's lead in the next several races - and then win a large enough majority in California to make the final difference. It's a long-shot, but it's still a shot - and that's enough to keep us going. The polls aren't looking great in California right now - but polls change - and Sanders has come up from so far behind that I believe he can do it.
We're in it to win it - and it's not over yet. Damn good numbers so far from Utah and Idaho.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Taking a strong showing to the convention, along with the 36-40% of the Democratic base that would rather vomit into their own shorts than see Hillary head the ticket, gives us some strong leverage. Maybe not on the nomination itself - but the VP pick, and the direction of the party, can be heavily swung by us, even if Sanders doesn't take it home.
dana_b
(11,546 posts)and i really think it's L.A. and probably San Diego that are going for Hillary. The Bay Area has two areas with the highest number of donations to Bernie. I could be wrong but that is what I read here a couple of days ago.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I dunno about the two non-contiguous, but Washington is the epicenter of Sandersnavia.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)tarheelsunc
(2,117 posts)all Sanders supporters could talk about was how red states don't matter and Democrats in those states shouldn't have a say in deciding who our nominee is. Idaho and Utah are about as red as it gets. I would hope to see the same sort of reactions for consistency's sake, but I'm not seeing them.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)A record low. 13% voted. Which means 87% ignored the chance to vote. What does that tell you?
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)Sanders has won Utah by a stunning 79% of the vote (with 64% reporting), and won Idaho by 78% (100% reporting). This means, with the AZ delegates he won, a NET GAIN of 15 delegates for Sanders!
See my thread on this (with all the numbers):
"Let's clear this up: SANDERS WON TONIGHT!"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511556922
All of the delegates have not yet been awarded, thus the NYT election site appears to say he gained only 6, but if you add up the total delegates at issue (131), and add up the delegates awarded so far (with returns still coming in) (108), there are 23 delegates yet to be awarded. When all is said and done, Sanders will be 15 delegates ahead of Clinton in these 3 states (provided delegates are awarded based on % of the votes, which I believe they are).
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results
THIS MEANS that Sanders gained ground, and did not fall further behind, which was exactly what he needed to do. A bigger win in AZ would've been great (BTW, AZ is still at 92% reporting after it changed a point in Sanders' favor--reports are still coming in), but Sanders is still in it. That is what he--and we--accomplished on March 22, despite every handicap imaginable being piled onto this campaign by the powers-that-be.
So, ignore the Corrupt News headlines tomorrow and know that this was a BIG WIN for Sanders. Onward we go!
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)She can't go full smug now.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Largest caucus in history, with more than 15,000 people attending.
forest444
(5,902 posts)And even if he didn't there's still the issue of Hillary's indictment. Ms. Inevitable will have to step aside if that happens, regardless of how many delegates she has in her pocket.