Tue May 31, 2016, 09:35 AM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
California will be seismic
Roughly 1.8 Million new voter registrations. Which skew young big time.
Roughly 4.8 Million votes were cast in the 2008 Democratic primary. I seriously doubt the poll sampling reflects 1 in 5 voters will be new registrations, thus I think Bernie will (again) exceed the polls, but will it be enough to gain an outrageous advantage of like 70%? Considering the ad buys and the hasty return to Ca by camp weathervane, I have a really good feeling about Ca!
|
82 replies, 7003 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
hootinholler | May 2016 | OP |
ucrdem | May 2016 | #1 | |
Zorro | May 2016 | #21 | |
JonLeibowitz | May 2016 | #29 | |
brush | May 2016 | #35 | |
JonLeibowitz | May 2016 | #41 | |
brush | May 2016 | #46 | |
Kentonio | May 2016 | #77 | |
Demsrule86 | May 2016 | #66 | |
reddread | May 2016 | #2 | |
Hiraeth | May 2016 | #37 | |
lagomorph777 | May 2016 | #3 | |
BlueStateLib | May 2016 | #20 | |
Reiyuki | May 2016 | #34 | |
Renew Deal | May 2016 | #44 | |
LoverOfLiberty | May 2016 | #57 | |
Dem2 | May 2016 | #4 | |
ucrdem | May 2016 | #8 | |
Nyan | May 2016 | #5 | |
Lodestar | May 2016 | #18 | |
msanthrope | May 2016 | #33 | |
Renew Deal | May 2016 | #45 | |
Renew Deal | May 2016 | #6 | |
firebrand80 | May 2016 | #7 | |
artislife | May 2016 | #9 | |
grossproffit | May 2016 | #80 | |
sufrommich | May 2016 | #10 | |
Joob | May 2016 | #11 | |
Agschmid | May 2016 | #28 | |
Joob | May 2016 | #31 | |
CentralMass | May 2016 | #58 | |
Viva_La_Revolution | May 2016 | #82 | |
brooklynite | May 2016 | #12 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #17 | |
msanthrope | May 2016 | #32 | |
brooklynite | May 2016 | #36 | |
Octafish | May 2016 | #13 | |
ucrdem | May 2016 | #15 | |
Octafish | May 2016 | #22 | |
ucrdem | May 2016 | #23 | |
Octafish | May 2016 | #24 | |
ucrdem | May 2016 | #27 | |
ContinentalOp | May 2016 | #62 | |
WhiteTara | May 2016 | #78 | |
randome | May 2016 | #14 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #19 | |
riversedge | May 2016 | #54 | |
Yurovsky | May 2016 | #68 | |
Lodestar | May 2016 | #16 | |
Adrahil | May 2016 | #25 | |
Sheepshank | May 2016 | #26 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #38 | |
Sheepshank | May 2016 | #39 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #30 | |
Donald Ian Rankin | May 2016 | #40 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #42 | |
Donald Ian Rankin | May 2016 | #43 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #50 | |
Post removed | May 2016 | #52 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #55 | |
Godhumor | May 2016 | #47 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #48 | |
Godhumor | May 2016 | #49 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #53 | |
Cursive | May 2016 | #56 | |
PeaceNikki | May 2016 | #67 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #69 | |
PeaceNikki | May 2016 | #70 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #72 | |
PeaceNikki | May 2016 | #73 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #75 | |
PeaceNikki | May 2016 | #76 | |
Uponthegears | May 2016 | #79 | |
pdsimdars | May 2016 | #51 | |
blackspade | May 2016 | #59 | |
edbermac | May 2016 | #60 | |
StevieM | May 2016 | #61 | |
BootinUp | May 2016 | #74 | |
MineralMan | May 2016 | #63 | |
Octafish | May 2016 | #64 | |
Demsrule86 | May 2016 | #65 | |
ecstatic | May 2016 | #71 | |
Samantha | May 2016 | #81 |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 09:36 AM
ucrdem (15,502 posts)
1. I have a good feeling too
![]() |
Response to ucrdem (Reply #1)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:38 AM
Zorro (15,680 posts)
21. Me too
I don't think it's some sort of groundswell for Bernie.
A lot of those new registrations are from minority groups spooked by Trump. |
Response to Zorro (Reply #21)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:28 AM
JonLeibowitz (6,282 posts)
29. Indeed, and young latinos prefer Bernie.
Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #29)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:40 AM
brush (49,973 posts)
35. Really, like they did in Arizona and Texas (not). I wouldn't be so sure of that.
Since when have POCs favored Sanders all across the country?
It's been pretty well proven that he doesn't do well in diverse states. And popular Gov. Jerry Brown just endorsed Clinton. |
Response to brush (Reply #35)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:49 AM
JonLeibowitz (6,282 posts)
41. Diverse states like Washington, Alaska, Oklahoma, and Hawai'i?
Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #41)
Tue May 31, 2016, 12:03 PM
brush (49,973 posts)
46. Oh, quite a long list there.
Hawaii, ok, but Washington, Alaska? No way.
You want me to list all the diverse states that Clinton won? It'd be a lot longer than 2 or three states. |
Response to brush (Reply #46)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:20 PM
Kentonio (4,377 posts)
77. Alaska is extremely diverse.
Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #41)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:59 PM
Demsrule86 (67,146 posts)
66. I would not add Washington to that group
As a non-binding primary drew out 3 times the voters and Clinton won.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 09:36 AM
reddread (6,896 posts)
2. oh but she's coming and bringing Hell with her
we will fall for her charms at the last minute.
Bernie who? |
Response to reddread (Reply #2)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:41 AM
Hiraeth (4,805 posts)
37. I am cautiously hopeful but, never underestimate the adversary. Powerful machinery behind her.
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 09:37 AM
lagomorph777 (30,613 posts)
3. I have noticed a blackout of CA polls
...but I think Hillary's internal polling has spooked her.
|
Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #3)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:37 AM
BlueStateLib (937 posts)
20. field poll california this thursday
Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #3)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:39 AM
Reiyuki (96 posts)
34. No blackout, but RCP polls are swinging way past MOE
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ca/california_democratic_presidential_primary-5321.html
HRC is +2 to +18 depending which polls you're looking at. Pretty insane stuff. The last couple primaries that had these huge swings ended in Bernie's favor, so it's definitely in the realm of possibility.. |
Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #3)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:58 AM
Renew Deal (81,381 posts)
44. Bernie had a statement today saying he's going to keep running no matter what.
He only talks like that when he knows he's in trouble.
|
Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #3)
Tue May 31, 2016, 01:22 PM
LoverOfLiberty (1,438 posts)
57. Clearly she went to CA one day early
because of the Brown endorsement.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 09:38 AM
Dem2 (8,164 posts)
4. I've Got a Feeling
A feeling I can't hide oh no, oh no, oh yeah yeah! I've got a feeling yeah!
|
Response to Dem2 (Reply #4)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:13 AM
ucrdem (15,502 posts)
8. shake shake shake
shake shake shake
shake your boo-ty |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:02 AM
Nyan (1,192 posts)
5. I'm very jittery about the fact that there's not gonna be exit polls.
Response to Nyan (Reply #5)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:31 AM
Lodestar (2,388 posts)
18. Volunteers need to take up the exit polling. It's a red flag if exits are not counted. n/t
Response to Nyan (Reply #5)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:34 AM
msanthrope (37,549 posts)
33. It means there's no point. nt
Response to Nyan (Reply #5)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:59 AM
Renew Deal (81,381 posts)
45. I think they want to spend their exit poll money in NJ
So they can declare Hillary the winner quickly.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:10 AM
Renew Deal (81,381 posts)
6. California doesn't matter either way but it is starting to shape up just like NY.
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:11 AM
firebrand80 (2,760 posts)
7. It would be a nice moral victory for Bernie
But it won't stop Hillary from being the nominee.
|
Response to firebrand80 (Reply #7)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to artislife (Reply #9)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:29 PM
grossproffit (5,591 posts)
80. You're kidding, right? This isn't a television show.
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:15 AM
sufrommich (22,871 posts)
10. It would be as "seismic" as Hillary winning CA by 8 points in 2008.
In other words,too little too late.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:18 AM
Joob (1,065 posts)
11. It's Okay everyone, don't freak out. Pay attention to talking points. Be ready to strike back at 'em
We have the truth on our side and it's a powerful weapon. Especially since it's hard to lie in this day and age.
Connect the dots. For instance, animal rights protester. Sanders Rally. Later, "Environment group endorses Hillary" (though they sound like lobbyists, whatever didn't do full research yet) Either way, you can see where they plan to attack Bernie next, which is going to be comical. |
Response to Joob (Reply #11)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:26 AM
Agschmid (28,749 posts)
28. "whatever didn't do full research yet"
Sort of sums up this whole primary season...
![]() |
Response to Agschmid (Reply #28)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:32 AM
Joob (1,065 posts)
31. Yup. I got nauseous reading about them lobbying and making a PAC
I instantly closed it once I saw they were against fracking. I forgot how I found it, I think I typed in their name
*to be clear, closed it because of well, I could not even* |
Response to Joob (Reply #11)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:08 PM
CentralMass (15,143 posts)
58. I caught that as well.
Response to Joob (Reply #11)
Tue May 31, 2016, 08:15 PM
Viva_La_Revolution (28,791 posts)
82. the pac endorsed her, the group says it can't endorse as a non profit
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:21 AM
brooklynite (89,607 posts)
12. Do I take it then that Sanders has given up on NJ?
If he loses there, his threshold in CA goes up, up and away...
|
Response to brooklynite (Reply #12)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:31 AM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
17. Why do you think this has anything to do with NJ?
Want to talk about NJ? I suggest you start a thread.
|
Response to hootinholler (Reply #17)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:34 AM
msanthrope (37,549 posts)
32. Because NJ closes before CA. Math. nt
Response to hootinholler (Reply #17)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:40 AM
brooklynite (89,607 posts)
36. The OP is about Clinton coming back to CA to campaign...
...if she wasn't in CA, she'd likely be in NJ, right?
And since Bernie is spending all his time in CA, why shouldn't Hillary? |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:23 AM
Octafish (55,745 posts)
13. People are sick of the status quo.
In California and nationwide.
|
Response to Octafish (Reply #13)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:25 AM
ucrdem (15,502 posts)
15. We were sick of Bush and Ahnold, sure
So we elected Barack and Jerry. We're not sick of them at all. And California is still Clinton country.
|
Response to ucrdem (Reply #15)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:40 AM
Octafish (55,745 posts)
22. So why did you recall Gray Davis, when ENRON manufactured the ''energy crisis''?
Arnold rode up in his white horse and no one mentioned his friendship with Kenny Boy Lay.
|
Response to Octafish (Reply #22)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:42 AM
ucrdem (15,502 posts)
23. Don't blame me. I voted for Bustamante.
But yeah the whole thing was a scam. As for how they pulled the vote off, I've never had a lot of confidence in CA vote counting though in the last decade it's gotten better as we've had a couple of good SoS's.
p.s. Bustamante was the Dem alternative in the recall election that was engineered by our own VRWC. |
Response to ucrdem (Reply #23)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:15 AM
Octafish (55,745 posts)
24. I'm sorry: I did not mean to imply it was your fault.
Thanks for heads-up! From what you've posted on DU over the years, I know you're a good Democrat, ucrdem.
Good luck next week! |
Response to Octafish (Reply #22)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:45 PM
ContinentalOp (5,356 posts)
62. Because Californians are not really that liberal overall, and we LOVE celebrity
Both of those factors work in Clinton's favor imo. I think CA voters are just fine with establishment politicians, and I don't think the Davis recall was an anti-establishment thing. Look out our current governor and both of our senators. They're about as establishment as it gets.
|
Response to Octafish (Reply #22)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:21 PM
WhiteTara (28,772 posts)
78. That was first year of voting machines in Riverside county
and they stole the votes.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:24 AM
randome (34,845 posts)
14. You just can't stop being negative, can you? "Camp Weathervane".
![]() [hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to randome (Reply #14)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:34 AM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
19. Hillary can't stop shifting positions can she?
It's like voting for a wheel of fortune, you have no clue what you will get when you ante up.
|
Response to hootinholler (Reply #19)
Tue May 31, 2016, 01:03 PM
riversedge (67,549 posts)
54. When New credible information comes to lite-It is a sign of a critical thinker to assess
the situation and change course.
|
Response to riversedge (Reply #54)
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:09 PM
Yurovsky (2,064 posts)
68. Seriously? Like gay marriage?
What changed between Senator Clinton's vocal opposition to gay marriage and full LGBT rights and her tepid support after she fired up the POTUS campaign bus?
Public opinion, that's what. The very essence of having no moral compass, but rather just sticking a finger in the air to check the prevailing political winds. Critical thinking? Is that a joke? |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:27 AM
Lodestar (2,388 posts)
16. Will require unprecedented vigilance via 'work-arounds' of information gathering,
eyewitnesses in all areas...on the ground and in the cyber sphere to watchdog and document,
collect exit polls, etc. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:20 AM
Adrahil (13,340 posts)
25. 30+ points good?
Say Bernie wins by 20 points...a very optimistic outcome for him. Then what? He will STILL fall short of what he needs.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:21 AM
Sheepshank (12,504 posts)
26. yeah...well your predictive ability actually suck.
Response to Sheepshank (Reply #26)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:42 AM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
38. I know!
That's why I didn't actually make any predictions.
|
Response to hootinholler (Reply #38)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:45 AM
Sheepshank (12,504 posts)
39. Unsubstantiated guessing on the polling, is predictive
...thus I think Bernie will (again) exceed the polls, but will it be enough to gain an outrageous advantage of like 70%?
Considering the ad buys and the hasty return to Ca by camp weathervane, I have a really good feeling about Ca! you are not good at it. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:29 AM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
30. I wonder
What Secretary Clinton will tell unbound delegates (super or otherwise) if she can't carry the state with the largest electoral prize against a candidate whom she maintains isn't even in the race?
Electability . . . it matters AND electability = electoral votes Where does Secretary Clinton make up for losing True Blue/True Bernie California and its 55 electoral votes? |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #30)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:47 AM
Donald Ian Rankin (13,598 posts)
40. Losing the primary would not be good evidence of Sanders' electability.
Pointing at one state and saying "The votes in this state are magically more important; even though Clinton got more votes, Sanders should be counted the winner because his votes count for more" is not going to cut it.
|
Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #40)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:54 AM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
42. Oh and the spin starts
almost immediately.
Go ahead and say it . . . you know you want to . . . Here is a FACT If Hillary cannot take California in the GE (a possibility worth considering if she cannot even beat an "already defeated" Bernie in the primary with Jerry Brown standing next to her), she has to make up with 55 ELECTORAL VOTES that USED TO BE solid Blue. Now take off your Hillary glasses and tell us: WHERE DOES SHE GET THEM? |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #42)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:56 AM
Donald Ian Rankin (13,598 posts)
43. If Clinton turns into a mongoose, she will have to learn to use sign language.
*If* Hillary cannot take California against Trump, *then* she will find it difficult (but not impossible) to win the general election.
*If* Sanders cannot take all the states he's lost to Clinton against Trump, *then* he would be mathematically certain to lose. |
Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #43)
Tue May 31, 2016, 12:48 PM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
50. Oh my
condescension instead of an answer.
Tempted, as I am, to rely on the fact that, in the GE, Hillary is going to lose the majority of states she's won against Bernie in the primary (particularly assuming a divided party), suffice to say that your If/Then blather leaves something to be desired. The statement was structurally correct. The fact that you disagree with the premise (i.e., that a poor showing against a "weak" (in your mind) candidate in a primary where so much is stacked in her favor evidences a political weakness that does not bode well for the GE) does not change that. Now take a stab at telling us where Hillary can pick up 55 electoral votes. With Hillary behind in the polls in Ohio, California is everything. |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #50)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #52)
Tue May 31, 2016, 01:14 PM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
55. Nice language
Here's a reality check for you
Hillary won't take North Carolina, or Mississippi, or Georgia, or Missouri, or Iowa, or Arizona (are you clicking these off as you go?) She's behind in Ohio (still clicking?) What's 227 + 55? Here's the bottom line, Hillary needs Bernie's people in the GE. She particularly needs them in states with a large number of electoral votes. |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #42)
Tue May 31, 2016, 12:08 PM
Godhumor (6,437 posts)
47. ... that's not really how we use if-then statements
Obama lost California to an already defeated Clinton in 2008. He had no problem carrying it in the GE.
There is no correlation between primary results and GE results, because overall states demographics and voter inclinations vary wildly to primary demographics and inclinations. |
Response to Godhumor (Reply #47)
Tue May 31, 2016, 12:34 PM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
48. Clinton wasn't already
defeated in 2008 . . . did you forget the party line?
I think it goes like this: "Hillary was MUCH closer, that's why SHE was justified in not conceding until AFTER the last primary." |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #48)
Tue May 31, 2016, 12:44 PM
Godhumor (6,437 posts)
49. I was a Clinton backer in 2008. She was already defeated and talked about as such
Regardless, it still doesn't matter to your "if-then" proposition. Not how it works.
|
Response to Godhumor (Reply #49)
Tue May 31, 2016, 01:00 PM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
53. Hmmm
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/breaking-hillary-concedes-that-she/
Btw, just because you don't like admitting the political weakness that would be demonstrated by a CA loss, doesn't mean the If/Then "doesn't work." Hillary has no leeway. Even if she carries the rest of Obama's electoral total except for Ohio, where she is behind, she loses the GE if she can't take California. She has nowhere else to look for electoral votes, a fact proven by your dodging the question. Hillary knows it . . . why don't you? |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #30)
Tue May 31, 2016, 01:21 PM
Cursive (89 posts)
56. Obama lost Cali to Clinton in '08
![]() |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #30)
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:02 PM
PeaceNikki (27,985 posts)
67. President McCain totally agrees with you.
Obama lost CA by 8+ points in the primary.
|
Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #67)
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:59 PM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
69. Good try guys
Hillary was still in the thick of the battle. According to the Hillary camp, Bernie has been toast since Super Tuesday. Losing by 8% to a strong candidate (backed by the Democratic Establishment) does not mean one is weak. Losing to a malcontent who has no chance of winning and is trying to destroy the party (Hillary supporters' words, not mine) does.
Do you get the difference? |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #69)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:01 PM
PeaceNikki (27,985 posts)
70. Please link to where HRC called BS a
"malcontent who has no chance of winning and is trying to destroy the party".
kthxbai Also, she'll get the required delegates to be the nominee before polls even close in CA.... so..... |
Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #70)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:10 PM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
72. Did you miss the word "supporters?"
Kinda like you missed the words "super delegates are free to vote for anyone they choose?"
|
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #72)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:13 PM
PeaceNikki (27,985 posts)
73. OK, Can you link to that quote from a supporter, please and thanks?
Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #73)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:16 PM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
75. in passim
The greater challenge is to find a Hillary supporter who has described him in any other way.
|
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #75)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:17 PM
PeaceNikki (27,985 posts)
76. so... no.
kthxbai
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 12:50 PM
pdsimdars (6,007 posts)
51. And, FYI, the upgrade to "camp weathervane" is Princess Weathervane and her ostrich army
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:34 PM
blackspade (10,056 posts)
59. I think he has a good chance in CA.
But even with a win it is highly unlikely That he will get a large enough margin.
But hope springs eternal. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:38 PM
edbermac (15,788 posts)
60. Jury results
On Tue May 31, 2016, 02:22 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
You fucking hypocrite. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2094188 REASON FOR ALERT This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. ALERTER'S COMMENTS personal attack JURY RESULTS You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 31, 2016, 02:36 PM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT. Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT Explanation: lots of ways to call someone a hypocrite w/o being an ass. Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT Explanation: No explanation given Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: No explanation given Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: No explanation given Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT Explanation: Getting a little crude there, Donald Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT Explanation: No explanation given Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT Explanation: That topic header is personal attack. The poster could have said any number of things that would have allowed the rest of the post to stand. The poster in Question has been here long enough to know better. Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:39 PM
StevieM (10,480 posts)
61. I expect a 10 point Clinton victory. (eom)
Response to StevieM (Reply #61)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:14 PM
BootinUp (44,947 posts)
74. I'm sticking with 10-15. nt
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:48 PM
MineralMan (145,660 posts)
63. Well, that's California's fault.
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:52 PM
Octafish (55,745 posts)
64. He's only down, what, 10-points?
Bernie could make that up in a day.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:57 PM
Demsrule86 (67,146 posts)
65. It won't
That is what is really sad for you guys...it won't. All Hil needs is 10% and I am sure she will get that. Obama lost California ...at the end there is no momentum except for the concession speech...hurry up on that one
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:03 PM
ecstatic (31,785 posts)
71. Bernie doesn't win diverse states, last I checked.
Of course, we might be in for a surprise. I guess "we'll see." 👀
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Tue May 31, 2016, 05:01 PM
Samantha (9,314 posts)
81. A political earthquake? Perhaps so knowing that pollsters don't usually count new voters
and I believe there is over a million, perhaps a million and one-half, new voters, the majority of which are in the age group Bernie attracts.
Anything can happen, but I feel good about his chances. Either way, though, the man has put in a Herculean effort and no one deny he has made a difference. He is my political hero. Sam |