How come the Sanders camp acts like winning California will be a game changer?

[lunamagica]

Even if he won he can't catch up.

Is it because it's the last state and "momentum".

Hillary won California in '08. Back then she and Obama were much MUCH closer than Hillary and Sanders are now...so, I don't get it.

[bravenak]

1. I have no idea. Never seen anything so pathetic

[Cha]

9. I say to fool the kids out of more $27 donations

It’s not a conspiracy, as some angry Sanders backers suggest, a result of dark magic or a wrinkle in the time-space continuum. Rather, it’s the rules that Democrats play by — rules that now work to Clinton’s advantage, even as they thwarted her candidacy eight years ago, when she lost a nominating fight to then-Sen. Barack Obama

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/may/29/sanders-keeps-winning-why-isnt-clinton-losing/

Do tell San Diego Union..

[bravenak]

11. He just wants extra special rules. Nope!

[Cha]

12. Right.. contary to what he may think..

he's not that special.

[stopbush]

2. Like the Bush administration, Team Sanders

is creating their own reality.

[fleabiscuit]

3. Another $27 will help retire his campaign debt. nt

[stopbush]

4. Sadly, that $27 is all it's about for them at this point.

Sanders will continue lying to his hapless followers who will continue to send their hard-earned cash to him until the primaries are over. After June 7, his chances to raise more $ drop considerably.

Take a look over in that other group. You'll see that their zealotry hasn't diminished an inch. The more Sanders fails, the more $ they send him.

Sanders is staring at a huge campaign debt. He needs $ to pay it off.

[Cha]

10. Another zillion of those little $27 cash flows.

[TeamPooka]

5. The Sanders camp is counting on a magic conversion of all superdelegates

[charlyvi]

6. He thinks if he wins California

He can make a stronger case to the super delegates to switch their support to him. It won't happen, but that's his only play at this point. He will probably add the email report into the mix as well. Still won't happen, though.

[lunamagica]

8. But Hillary won California, and still lost the nomination

[charlyvi]

33. But Hillary did not argue that since she won CA, the super delegates should switch to her

She respected their decision to back Obama because of his combined pledged and super delegate lead, even though she won CA. She recognized the legitimacy of super delegates and respected their decision. Bernie doesn't think her lead in pledged delegates justifies giving her the nomination. His argument consists of his lead against Trump in the polls and his momentum; that's why he thinks the supers should switch. He's also saying that an outright win should come through pledged delegates only and neither of them will get to that magic 2383 total through pledged delegates alone. Most don't agree, but that's his argument.

On edit: Plus, CA has 475 delegates, more than any other state. He thinks if he can sweep most of them, his momentum argument will be that much stronger. Highly unlikely, though. As we have seen with other states, awarding delegates proportionately makes it very difficult to sweep a state. At most, he would probably get half of them.

[caquillo]

34. In 2008...

Hillary won the delegate-rich states of CA, NY, PA, MA, MI, FL (though MI and FL were discounted for being held early) and still lost the nomination. This year, all those states went to Hillary, save for MI, which he only won by 1.5 points, so it was a wash, since they just split the delegates. CA hasn't happened yet, but Hillary looks poised to take it. Even if Sanders were to win CA, it will be a close call (like MI) and once again they'll split the vote, and he would have gained anothing.

[SharonClark]

18. That is my understanding as well.

[anotherproletariat]

7. Someone should ask them...I have no idea why one state would be more important.

It's a matter of delegates. It doesn't matter where they come from, super or otherwise...those are the pre-determined rules.

[still_one]

13. Those who were registered Democrats in the last election will most likely go with Hillary.

The new registrations most likely will go with Sanders.

I suspect the final result will be within a 10 point spread.

We will see June 7th, but Sanders sure is going to garner over 30% of the votes, no matter what his echo chamber spews

[DLCWIdem]

16. if they managed to fix their registrations in time

I heard about 2 months ago that there had been a dramatic increase in registrations for the AI G party to the tune of a couple hundred thousand. At the nearest point I heard that only about 35,000 had managed to change their registration. If that is true then I predict it could be more than a 10 point spread.

[still_one]

17. It is too late for them to fix their registrations if they haven't done it by now

While they were jumping up and down on DU about this, about a week ago, all they would have had to do is go online and re-register, but that deadline is passed now.

I am sorry, but the rules are very clear in California. If they register as AI party, and they meant to register as NPP, whose fault is that?

Those that did that obviously did not want to be associated with the Democratic party, because if they registered as Democrats in the first place then there would not have been any issue

They don't impress me very much

[Her Sister]

25. But I think/heard many new registrations are from Latinos and want to vote Anti-Trump!

So not necessarily registering for Sanders!

[still_one]

30. When I was doing call banking most of the folks with Latino names were strong for Hillary

But glad to hear that new regs may be with us

Thanks

[Squinch]

14. Because he is addicted to the attention at this point and those who still believe him

will believe anything he says and give him that attention.

[beachbum bob]

15. well it means sanders is a winner!!! EXCEPT he lost the nomination already

sander followers don't like the rules that the person with the delegate lead actually wins....

[asuhornets]

19. Hillary must win California;if only for the optics. I want her to finish strong...nt

[lunamagica]

22. She will finish strong regardless, but yes, the optics oc winning California would be awesome

[JSup]

20. Because if he wins...

...the momentum of his campaign will hit 1.21 gigawatts and catapult his wins into the past where he will defeat Hillary's machinations and win every state on Super Tuesday.

[still_one]

21. Hopefully New Jersey will put her over the top, and if we win California

it will be gravy

[George II]

23. The point behind all of this is that "winning" isn't so important, winning by a certain margin...

...in order to catch up is important.

We're far beyond the time that winning proves anything. Even if Sanders were to win by 40% (70%-30%) he'll have too few delegates to make up the huge difference.

Best case for Sanders is that he'll win by 60-40, giving him less than a hundred more delegates than Clinton. That's simply too little WAY too late.

But it's more likely that he'll lose outright.

[pandr32]

24. Actually, California won't even matter

The math shows that the Virgin islands and Puerto Rico will close much of the remaining gap (roughly 70) of what is needed, and then only about one third of New Jersey's delegates will be needed for an announcement that she has clinched the nomination. New Jersey (because of the time difference) will happen before California. California is just icing on the nominee cake--Hillary doesn't even need it.

The game changer is that Bernie Sanders is done already and some people just haven't gotten the news. It will dawn on them eventually.

Bernie has been stringing his supporters along and now wants to use them as leverage to get concessions from the Democrat Party. He knows his name will be Mud in the Senate because of his behavior, so he will want to act like the de facto "real" leader of "the American People" or just "the People"--whom he presumes to speak for and safeguard in order to bluster loud and long as he will try to get as much limelight and credit as possible while saying yeah or nay in a vote (his will be so-oooo important, unlike everyone else's). He never earned anyone's respect in Congress the usual way.

This posturing of his is all he's got left to feel important and is likely why he will not lift a finger to help his supporters transition to supporting the nominee.

[Her Sister]

26. Such great explanation! The end is coming and Sanders wants to DRAG it all he can!

That's all he can do now! After the end! Well, The End!

[pandr32]

31. Thank you Her Sister!

It will feel so good to finally turn the page into the GE officially, but Bernie will keep trying to turn the page back like a malware pop-up window that is hard to delete.

[spyker29]

27. Political naivety.

[BootinUp]

28. Fits their goofy narrative. nt

[CrowCityDem]

29. Plus, he'll lose DC the next week. Where would that 'momentum' be?

[Iliyah]

32. Seems like BS' campaign have forgotten one thing tho

None of the primary and or caucuses are winner take all pledged delegates.

[caquillo]

35. His young supporters don't seem to understand the process

I run into them frequently on Facebook or on the comments section of articles (where they post via their FB profile), and their thinking is, "Sanders is only behind Hillary by 270 pledged delegates, but CA has 475, so if he wins, he'll not only erase the deficit, but overtake her in the count." I've tried to explain (many times!) that Democratic primaries don't have winner-takes-all contests and that pledged delegates are awarded proportionately, so Sanders needs to win CA by a wide margin (by like 75 points), in order to make a difference, and even then it won't be much at this point. But they don't seem to understand. They're too preoccupied with winning states, as opposed to focusing on the delegate count. I guess, because, in their young minds, winning sounds good, no matter what. After all, winning the Super Bowl or World Series by just one point still makes you the champion.