So far HRC is doing much better in caucuses than she did in 2008

[book_worm]

This is one of the areas the campaign needed to do better in 2016 than in 2008 and so far it is working. Up to now there have been five caucuses and HRC has won three of them: Iowa, Nevada and America Somoa. But more important is the number of delegates she has won. In 2016 from those five caucuses HRC has won 106 delegates compared to 73 won against Barack Obama. In almost every one of these caucuses HRC has improved her percentage of the vote as well--most dramatically in Iowa, but also in Colorado and Minnesota. In Nevada she got only slightly less victory margin than in 2008--5.8% vs. 5.3%.

Today Bernie is favored in caucuses in Nebraska and Kansas--two states again with overwhelmingly white populations. But watch and see the popular vote and delegate count. In 2008 Then Sen. Obama won Nebraska caucuses 67-32 and took away 16 delegates to HRC's 8. In Kansas Obama won an overwhelming 74-26 and swept the delegate count 23-9. My feeling is that in both states HRC will improve both her showings in the popular vote and delegate count today.

Anyway, HRC will have a big victory tonight with Louisiana where she should sweep to an overwhelming victory in both the popular and delegate vote. It's worth remembering that Obama won LA in 2008 57-35--and my guess is that HRC will get nearly 70% of the vote in the state tonight.

[BlueMTexpat]

1. I believe as you do, BW!

She will pick up delegates in the caucuses whether she "wins" or not and, thanks to LA, she should still come out with a net positive in delegates overall. She will certainly increase her popular votes total substantially and she is already well ahead in that.

Of course, being ahead in the popular vote ONLY counts when one is not Hillary.

[livetohike]

2. Bookmarking. Thanks for pointing this out.

[Thinkingabout]

3. Hillary has a campaign team who knows how to work the campaign. It's a plus.

[CalvinballPro]

7. Yes, she does, especially since she added members of Obama's 2008 delegate team to her own.

Learning from mistakes, another reason I support Hillary Clinton. I can't stand behind a candidate who always thinks they're right about everything.

[SunSeeker]

4. K & R

[NurseJackie]

5. She understands that having the most DELEGATES wins her the nomination.

The obsession that Bernie's campaign and supporters have with being able claim individual state "wins" (for delegate-poor states) and not focusing on the delegate-RICH states (even the ones that he'll lose) seems very odd to me.

Time is running out for him. It's probably too late to adjust his strategy now. (Oh well, I'm not complaining ... just observing.)

Go, Hillary! We love you!

[jmowreader]

8. Bernie isn't focusing on those states because he knows it's a waste of time

The delegate-rich states have a LOT of black people in them, and Bernie's having a hell of a time connecting with black people.

"But...but...but...I marched with Martin Luther King Jr!"
"We know. We ALSO know you fled to Israel after a year down South, then moved your ass to the whitest fucking state in the Union as soon as you got back."

[CalvinballPro]

6. Yes, but wasn't John Edwards a factor for a period of time in 2008? This year is not a 3-person race

Delegates were being split completely differently that year, so a direct comparison is a bit hard to make this time around. Just sayin'.

[book_worm]

9. He wasn't in too long.

For instance he wasn't a factor in Colorado and Minnesota. He was a factor in Iowa but HRC went from third place with about 28% of the vote there in 2008 to first with just under 50% in 2016. He was hardly a factor at all in Nevada in 2008 where he got under 4%.