WTF Is MSNBC Doing Showing Washington State Dem Primary Results When DEm Primary WON By Sandersin March? Showing Hillary ahead... This is more PROPAGANDA... CORRUPTION ON A MASSIVE SYSTEMIC SCALE...
These are the primaries.
Edited to add: Is this your first primary season?
And I wouldn't be surprised if Clinton tried to drive out her vote to push this narrative.
why didn't they do anything to counteract that?
And here's another question: Was Clinton running ads in Washington state the last few weeks or days? Was Sanders?
Seems pretty obvious to me...
Primaries are also being held for down ballot races. They did this eight years ago (if anyone was paying attention) and no one went apeshit.
The More Bullsh*t the merrier...
since every one of Washington's major Democratic office holders has already pledged to Hillary, and the Sanders people have been harassing them. It will be a good defense for them.
Thanks. We all voted today. A ballot was sent to every voter in WA state.
When way more people voted in the primary...it shows Bernie does not deserve the delegates...which is probably true of most caucuses he won.
Because of Clinton's big lead, Sanders must flip more than 200 of her superdelegates if he hopes to reach 2,383.
But first, in order to sway them, Sanders will have to win a majority of pledged delegates from primaries and caucuses, his senior strategist Tad Devine has acknowledged. Superdelegates have never before lifted a candidate to the nomination when he or she trailed in the number of pledged delegates.
"I know that it is a steep road," Sanders said at a recent campaign rally, "but if we do very, very well in New Mexico, California and the other states on June 7, my hope is that we end this process with 50 percent plus one of the pledged delegates."
Sanders is far behind on that front.
Clinton is on an easy path to reach 2,026 pledged delegates or more than half the 4,051 total on June 7. She will get there even if she loses solidly in all six states.
Sanders needs more than 67 percent of the remaining pledged delegates to overtake her, requiring landslide victories.
He'd insist delegates be seated by the primary because more people participated.
Last edited Tue May 24, 2016, 11:07 PM - Edit history (4)
Bernie won a caucus 73-27 when 230k people showed up. Now he losing with over 500k votes counted. Your guy benefited from an undemocratic process here, not HRC.
Thanks for clearing that up.
And, hey, at least Obama was able to hold serve on the WA primary in '08. Then again, he was a much stronger candidate.
can gloat about the popular vote. The fact is here in WA the Democratic Party decided not to assign any delegates based on the primary. No delegates will come from the WA state primary. I was going to fill out my ballot and vote for Bernie but not only is the primary useless this election, but you have to check mark a box saying you are a Democrat. I just couldn't do it. I did it for the caucus because I knew that my vote would help select delegates, but I'm not check marking a box saying I'm a Democrat when my vote in the primary means absolutely nothing.
Ia., Massachusetts, Az., NY, Maryland... etc.
We will set the rules set in stone State to State
So that's how you view people exercising their fucking rights?
a post by them, you can pretty much have your way with them, and they will never know! Have fun!!
It's the rules. It's the process. Do it or dont. WA is a democratic state. It's not a Sanders state or Clinton State. We're a blue state. Left coast. Love it or leave it. " faults" and all... ( earthquake faults...get it? ).
Would you like to malign them while you're at it?
Zero delegates. Probably a lot of people did not even vote knowing it had no effect on the delegate count.
Good to see people care about the downticket races.
at last count. Roughly 25 times the caucus totals.
children who can't afford a sitter to go caucusing, the disabled and elderly who can't stand in a room for hours (or days, apparently, like you did)...how is is it democratic for them?
and then the party bosses sued so that the primary wouldn't count. Yeah that is a whole heaping pile of democracy there.
For starters, Washington state parties had used a caucus/convention system to determine presidential preference in order select and allocate delegates to the national conventions in the earliest cycles of the post-reform era (1972-1988). After the 1988 cycle, however, an initiative push brought a presidential primary election to the northwest. In the time since that 1989 initiative, Democrats have never utilized the primary as a means of selecting, allocating or binding delegates. Instead, the Washington Democratic Party has opted to stick with the caucus/convention system.
and yes it did sue to retain that right.
I caucused, but to be honest, I really wish we'd gone with just the primary - the caucuses were clearly dominated by Sanders supporters, but my sense was that it was not really all that representative. I think that the caucuses should have focused primarily on platform, and left the actual election up to the primaries. Sanders would still have "won", but I suspect it would have been much closer to 53-47 than the 70% of the caucus result.
It is actually unrecognized in the state. The dems do a caucus there. The votes for the primary don't really count. It was the first I'd ever heard of it.
it's about calling an end to the primary season even tho she will not have 2383 PLEDGED delegates.
As of today she is 633 short. She will not make that up on the 7th.
Yes, she is closer but you know that old saying....
Close but no cigar.
...you know, like you expect the Superdelegates to do.
But this level of denial is really quite pathetic.
As the millions of Clinton voters just don't get it ... there are thousands of us being right and millions of them just being totally wrong ... the system is just totally corrupt and just ignores the totally awesome and powerful minority
Except that the corporate interests in this country are feeling very, very nervous about California.
Drama 24/7. First of all, what Sanders won in March was a caucus. Today they held a primary, which Hillary won.
No wonder so many think that the nomination is rigged, they are just completely ignorant of the process.
and vote, that has meaning. They are making their voices heard.
This time everyone gets to vote. Not just a few in a caucus.
to report things that are/have happened. Why is this such a problem for some people on here lately?
How exactly is it misrepresenting anything? Sanders won the caucus and as usual Clinton wins the primaries where far more people are able to vote. This has been repeated throughout the entire process.
And in the name of not looking like you learned idioms from Free Republic, the phrase is beyond the pale. Although given the historical origin of the phrase being derogatory to the Irish, perhaps it's better to just avoid the phrase given the recent ado over the phrase off the reservation.
Democrats hold a caucus that determine the candidate. It happened in March and HRC lost in ALL counties.
Republicans hold a primary and that just happened.
The State has to pay for a primary and they are required to have the names of ALL the presidential candidates listed on the ballot. The only race they are concerned with is on the GOP side.
I think that since the republican side already has their presumptive nominee that a lot of conservatives opted to fill out the democratic part of the ballot rather than the republican.
You really should try to keep up so that you don't look ridiculous.
Because the non-binding primary...Hillary clobbered him. Caucuses do not demonstrate the will of the voters in a state...disenfranchise many
Sanders won the undemocratic process.
Speaks volumes about Sanders appeal.
It's another sign that the nomination race is over.
It's on to fighting Trump for the win.
Don't like the results when an enormous number of people who find a primary easier to participate in actually get to vote?
know the difference before your post. Your OP looks foolish.
have anything to do with delegate allocations. The election was held, the votes were counted, and the news reported those results. Why should they not? I heard it on the CBS Morning News this morning. They gave the results and said that they didn't matter for the convention. Still, it happened and is news.
All Caps doesn't change the fact that people in Washington voted in this. BTW, it is a valid primary for state and local offices, but doesn't affect Washinton's delegates to the national convention.
but lots more people than Sanders.