Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

redgreenandblue

(2,088 posts) Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:15 AM Feb 2016

Can someone explain: Do primaries use the "winner takes all" principle?

Does getting more delegates from a state mean ending up with all of them in the end?

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can someone explain: Do primaries use the "winner takes all" principle? (Original Post) redgreenandblue Feb 2016 OP

No DURHAM D Feb 2016 #1

Thanks. redgreenandblue Feb 2016 #3

Not for Dems. Goppers do have some winner take all states. morningfog Feb 2016 #2

Cool. redgreenandblue Feb 2016 #4

on democratic side, not really beachbum bob Feb 2016 #5

DURHAM D

(32,611 posts)

1. No

Reply to redgreenandblue (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:15 AM

Feb 2016

redgreenandblue

(2,088 posts)

3. Thanks.

Reply to DURHAM D (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:17 AM

Feb 2016

So I guess the term "tie" is not so inappropriate for Iowa. I thought 50% to 49% percent would mean the whole state goes to Clinton.

morningfog

(18,115 posts)

2. Not for Dems. Goppers do have some winner take all states.

Reply to redgreenandblue (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:16 AM

Feb 2016

redgreenandblue

(2,088 posts)

4. Cool.

Reply to morningfog (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:17 AM

Feb 2016

So this actually went really well for Bernie

beachbum bob

(10,437 posts)

5. on democratic side, not really

Reply to redgreenandblue (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:18 AM

Feb 2016

and if you understand "super delegates"...you see the commanding lead that Hillary has at this juncture is pretty much insurmountable for bernie to make up in the primaries....this ain't 2008 with the Obama campaign vs Hillary...

Reply to this discussion