The System Isn’t ‘Rigged’ Against Sanders; Clinton’s winning b/c more Democrats want her to

[riversedge]

Simple and clear for all to and understand.



May 26, 2016 at 1:36 PM

The System Isn’t ‘Rigged’ Against Sanders

Clinton’s winning because more Democrats want her to be the nominee.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-system-isnt-rigged-against-sanders/

By Harry Enten and Nate Silver



Nick Ut / AP

A week ago, New York Daily News columnist and Bernie Sanders supporter Shaun King tweeted the following about the Democratic caucuses in Washington, which took place in late March:

Whether King intended it or not, he implied that caucuses — which often require hours of participation and mean lower turnout — are representative of what would happen if a larger electorate had its say. Well, a funny thing happened in Washington on Tuesday: The state held a mail-in, beauty-contest primary — so voting was easy, but no delegates were at stake. (The Associated Press has declared Hillary Clinton the winner.) The results are still being finalized, but Clinton leads by about 6 percentage points with more than 700,000 votes counted. Sanders won the Washington caucuses, which had 230,000 participants, by 46 percentage points.

So, turnout was much higher in the Washington primary than in the caucuses, and Clinton did much better. Something similar happened in Nebraska, where Clinton lost the early March caucuses by 14 percentage points and won the early May primary, in which no delegates were awarded, by 7 points.

Nebraska and Washington are part of a pattern. As Sanders fans claim that the Democratic primary system is rigged against their candidate and that Sanders wins when turnout is higher, they fail to point out that Sanders has benefited tremendously from low-turnout caucuses. Indeed, if all the caucuses were primaries, Clinton would be winning the Democratic nomination by an even wider margin than she is now.

Let’s start out with the real-world numbers. Here are the delegate and vote totals by contest, including caucuses and primaries, so far:...............................


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Not the way to respond to a question Sanders!!

TWEET
Jon Saker
‏@Jonathan_Saker

“You are asking me questions about Latin America... but right now I’m running for president of the U.S."

Come on.

[brush]

1. Oh stop with the facts already. They don't want to hear that.

[RazBerryBeret]

2. More Democrats want her...

that alone won't win the election.
according to Gallup 1/16:
American Voters: 42% identify as independents, 29% as Democrats, 26% as Republicans

So even if EVERY Democrat "wanted" her (which we know isn't the case) she couldn't win with only the Democrat votes.

[SMC22307]

3. I come across very few enthusiastic Clinton supporters, Dem or Independent.

The majority "want her" only because they're duped into thinking she's the one to beat Trump.

[Surya Gayatri]

4. Massive K & R. Thanks for posting. Saw this link on RCP and came

over here to see if it had been posted. Sure enough!
Riversedge on the job, as usual.

[riversedge]

7. Attaching minimum wage increases to congressional pay raises, yes, that was Hillary!

And I just learned this today.

Candice-a Hillraiser
‏@artist4ever

Attaching minimum wage increases to congressional pay raises, yes, that was Hillary! #ImWithHer #ShesWithUs #HillYes


Candice-a Hillraiser
‏@artist4ever

Attaching minimum wage increases to congressional pay raises, yes, that was Hillary! #ImWithHer #ShesWithUs #HillYes

[rock]

5. Yep, how right you are

Too bad for the BSers that being loud and obnoxious doesn't get you extra points in the election.

[LAS14]

6. Yes. The simple truth.