Why does Van Jones on CNN keep saying Bernie can't catch up?

[wt1531]

In the last few days, even after Bernie's suprise Michigan win, Van Jones on cn keeps saying unless Bernie starts to win every remaining state left by about 40 points or more, he wouldn't be able to catch up to Hillary? Although I trust that he has studied this more closely than I, it still doesn't sound like something logical..if I am correct Hillary's pledged delegate lead is about 400 or so right? If so, there are close to 40 states left to compete in and if Bernie wins in most of them, why is it impossible to catch up to or pass Hillary in the end?

Can anybody care to explain?

If Bernie is already pronounced not to be able to catch up to Hillary even though he is winning and got the big Mo, why don't the pundits come out right and ask Bernie to give it up already....it is really astounding..they show Bernie is beating Hillary in almost the most important catagories and in the same breadth they speak as if she already has the nomination wrapped up.

[Cheese Sandwich]

1. I think maybe you're confusing Van Jones with someone else

I watched their whole thing and didn't hear him say that.

Somebody else was reporting delegate counts. Van Jones has been pretty good IMO.

[Peregrine Took]

12. I heard him say it this afternoon when Bill Press was a guest. N/t

[Nyan]

2. That's the new "meme," which will turn out to be bullshit later on.

She's already run out of red states. After the 15th, he's got nothing but catching up to do.

[calguy]

3. Cuz maybe it just might be TRUE!??!!

[dchill]

7. Maybe! Or maybe you need to brush up...

on some fairly basic math!

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

4. He needs to win every remaining state by 8 points, not 40 points.

Big difference there. 40 points would be 70-30 in every state. 8 points is only 54-46.

Hillary's delegate lead is only 215 right now.

[AtomicKitten]

5. I recall Hillary trailed by 187 delegates all the way into June 2008.

Perhaps those suggesting/insinuating Bernie should drop out should keep that in mind.

[daleanime]

8. +1

[Stallion]

9. Yeah and Clinton Lost Didn't She Despite Never Trailing as Bad as Bernie Does Now

nm

[AtomicKitten]

11. Bernie trails by 213 delegates. He's in pretty good shape.

Last edited Thu Mar 10, 2016, 02:31 AM - Edit history (1)

[JVS]

21. I also remember that, but to be fair there were plenty of people back then...

who thought she should drop out because "the math" was very much against her.

[dchill]

6. Van Jones has his agenda, and his agenda has numbers.

I think the actual percentage of remaining delegates needed is 54%, a very achievable number, IMO.

[Baobab]

10. A LOT more is riding on Hillary's winning than they let on. Decades of deception.

Sanders may represent a much larger change than they could ever admit. Due to things which are not known to the public.

To pick one that's fairly obvious, militarism. If Sanders were to win, we would have the first President in my lifetime who wasn't committed to a level of military spending which exceeds that of all the other countries in the world combined. The cost of that spending to our country's future is hard to estimate but I think it shows in how the government is pretending not to want to drastically increase low wage subcontracting in at least four or five major service sectors to lower wages. If we had the levels of education that are the norm in many other countries they wouldn't be able to get away with saying we had a labor shortage, because it would be obvious that we didn't. But instead of spending it to put our naturally grown smart people through college, they spent the money on smart bombs (a really high margin item I am sure) and then they want to mooch off on other countries investments in education.

[JTFrog]

13. Because he's good at math? n/t

[RichVRichV]

14. He is spreading the myth that all super delegates will go for Hillary no matter what.

To win the nomination outright (even if all super delegates went for Hillary) he would have to win the remaining states by 34 points (67% vs 33%). That would give Bernie 2383 pledged delegates vs Hillary's 1668 delegates. At that point even if every super delegate went to Hillary she couldn't get the majority of all delegates. Hillary would have to completely collapse for this to happen.


However to get the majority of pledged delegates, Bernie only needs to win by about 8 points in remaining states (54% vs 46%). This would mean he has more pledged delegates going into the convention than Hillary. She could still win on super delegates at that point. But as has been pointed out it would basically destroy the party to overturn the will of the people. Bernie can definitely get 54% of the remaining states votes.

[BreakfastClub]

17. Bernie has to win by 8 points in ALL remaining states? I mean, come on. nt

[RichVRichV]

18. No he has to win by an average of 8 points.

There are some he will win big and some he will lose big (few still in the south at least). Here is a breakdown of delegates left. It's not that far fetched for him to pull it off, even with the sizable hole from all the southern states.

[jeepers]

15. Must Bernie overwhelm to win?

So far Hillarys strength is in the south with those landslides giving her 450 delegates but weak in blue states with three squeakers. Bernies strength is in blue states with 9 wins.

Being as the dems will win the presidency in the blue states and not in the red states and that to date Bernie has shown himself to be the stronger candidate in the blue states even if Hillary manages to split the remaining states and delegate totals down the middle I believe the superdelegates will have to go with the candidate who can win blue states.

Add to that the lower voter turnout in Hillarys southern victories (51 % below 08 in Texas 31% in Arkansas) and the higher repub turnout we are currently watching and I would think that even if Bernie ends up with fewer pledge delegates, as the stronger candidate, the candidate who brings more people out to vote and the candidate who has won more blue states than his opponent the super delegates will have to go with him.

Delegate count can but does not necessarily mean strength. The idea that Bernie has to overwhelm his opponent from here on in to win the nom ignores the role super delegates are supposed to play.

[RichVRichV]

19. Don't forget the independent vote.

Bernie dominates Hillary in that demographic. And you can't win the general election without the independent vote. It makes up 40% of the general electorate.

[jeepers]

20. except for the DNC bias

everything points to a Bernie primary win.

[bravenak]

16. It is just true

[lovemydog]

22. Because though he clearly supports Bernie,

Van Jones has looked at the delegate counts, and what remains of the race, in a fairly objective manner. Sanders has won some states by narrow margins Hillary keeps winning other states by big margins. Unless something dramatically changes and Sanders wins some big states by huge margins (something like 60-40 or 70-30) it will be very difficult for Sanders to catch up to Clinton on the delegate count. I'm not saying it's impossible. But something would have to dramatically change from the way things have been going, even considering Sanders' win in Michigan. Clinton increased her delegate lead that day with a win in Mississippi by something like 70-30.

Hope that helps a bit.

Alternative answer: so people can throw Van Jones under the bus of 'people saying stuff they don't like hearing.'

[Optimism]

23. Wrong

You're obviously including the current Super delegate tally in your reasoning. They don't vote until the convention, and are fluid until then. Even Debbie WS (of all people) said they should not be included by media at this point, and yet they somehow are still allowed to do so, skewing the narrative. It's bullshit.

And tell me what's democratic about Vermonter Howard Dean getting to throw his Super delegate vote to Hillary, when the good voters of the state went overwhelmingly for Bernie ? Oh yeah, he's an insurance lobbyist now. Makes sense.

[lovemydog]

24. No, I'm not including the superdelegates.

I'm not trying to be overly argumentative. But if you'd like to show me your math that contradicts what I've tried to explain in broad terms, I'd be glad to read it. Realistic Sanders supporters and people within his campaign are looking at these numbers and saying that he must win some big states by larger margins. On the non-delegate counts, Clinton is leading by a pretty large margin. I still encourage everyone to vote and make their voices heard and vote even if anyone says it's over. It's not completely over.

To your other question, I don't like it either.