2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum‘A capacity to move voters’: Will California be Bernie Sanders’ golden state?
(snip)
Nobody appears to have told Sanders. The Vermont senator has set a punishing pace in California: in the last week alone he addressed crowds in National City, Vista, Irvine, Santa Monica, Anaheim, East Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Cathedral City, Lancaster, Ventura, San Pedro, Santa Barbara, Santa Maria, Pomona, Bakersfield, Fresno and Visalia.
Sanders has outspent Clinton on advertising and his ground game is strong; he has more than 55,000 volunteers in the state who have made more than two million phone calls, according to the campaign.
(snip)
Few attendees at Sanders rallies least of all Sanders seem the least bit phased. He is clearly having fun, eagerly accepting Donald Trumps challenge to debate him, a challenge the Republican hastily walked back , to avoid facing the 74-year-old former mayor of Burlington, Vermont mano-a-mano.
(snip)
This kind of intensive campaigning by the senator, it really does move a lot of voters, he said, pointing to the Michigan primary, which Sanders won despite being 10 points behind just a week before the vote. He has the capacity to move voters just by his presence at these large events.
Sanders energetic campaigning is certainly paying dividends. Recent polling shows Clintons lead in California a state she won against Barack Obama in 2008 is dwindling, with Sanders well within the margin for error, trailing by just 2% .
Californias primary is open, which means independents can vote. In other states, such voters have favored Sanders over Clinton, There have also been 1.5 million new registered voters, many under 30, a demographic Sanders has won elsewhere by enormous margins.
(snip)
https://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/a-capacity-to-move-voters-will-california-be-bernie-sanders-golden-state/
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)It may be close, he might even win ... but for him to win the nomination, BS would have to win California by like 50% or maybe more ... and that's just not going to happen.
dana_b
(11,546 posts)saying "Clinton will likely have reached the 2,383 delegates required for the nomination before Californias results even begin to come in"
No she won't!!! The supers don't vote until the convention - I wish they stop this shit!!
Demsrule86
(68,637 posts)they commit to that candidate...for example, 60 delegates committed to Obama in 08...you all don't get how it is done...Berner made some sort of deal...he is out after California..or DC.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)because they haven't voted yet! And they can change their mind at the Convention.
Got it?! Or don't get it. Argue all you want. But this is the 2nd person from the DNC that has said to stop including superdelegates in the candidates totals because they haven't voted yet. The first person was DWS herself.
Sam
Joob
(1,065 posts)If it's not. All hell breaks lose.
I don't think it is.
I say whoever has more pledged delegates seems fair. If it's a fair system.
Doesn't make sense otherwise. Sorry, I'm a first time voter, just giving my first impression on what I've learned.
demwing
(16,916 posts)if they go to the candidate that doesn't have the most pledged delegates, then they're undemocratic.
Given the possible outcomes, why exactly do we bother with "super" delegates?
Joob
(1,065 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)Oneness with the candidate, a holistic approach.
lmbradford
(517 posts)Look at those cities turnouts, look at all the money he spent, look at him going strong. They cant report that it is 53-47%. That would not counter his good argument enough.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)I can't wait until I am 74 so I can do all that!
I feel excited about California. Thanks so much for posting this, Uncle Joe.
Sam
senz
(11,945 posts)but the opposition will pull out the stops to screw things up for him and his campaign should stay alert and ready.