Hillary Clinton
Related: About this forumBernie Sanders may not have won Colorado after all
Clinton now looks likely to tie the Vermont senator 38-38 in the state's delegate count, according to projections from The Denver Post, Bloomberg Politics and The Associated Press. That includes a potential 38-28 split in Sanders' favor in projections based on Tuesday's preference poll results, plus 10 superdelegates (out of 12) who have committed to Clinton, the former secretary of state.
http://www.denverpost.com/election/ci_29587219/bernie-sanders-may-not-have-won-colorado-after
TheFarseer
(9,323 posts)Very demoralizing to HALF of the Democrats that we need in November, that your vote doesn't even count. Also plays into the entitled and smug image that Clinton is trying to fight. Super delegates is a terrible idea. If the idea is to over-rule the people, don't they think that will make a lot voters mad and tear the party apart? Super delegates should have never been implemented. It's almost as preposterous as adding 6 points to the Carolina Panthers score at the end of the Super Bowl and then seeing who wins because they're better, they just are. Everyone says they are.
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)Cha
(297,240 posts)Cha
(297,240 posts)helped set up the super delegate system, Tad Devine.. so they should talk to him.
Hillary had to live with the rules in 2008 and now sanders does.
sheshe2
(83,771 posts)Love you!
Cha
(297,240 posts)My home state!
Hillary and her supporters had to deal with this in 2008 and now sanders and his supporters have to deal with the rules.
I love your home state Cha.
Cha
(297,240 posts)didn't go for Hillary.. now I get to give her an update!
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)Cha
(297,240 posts)I love it when you go all bad ass.
Cha
(297,240 posts)I love it, too.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)CdnExtraNational
(105 posts)Perhaps the party is divided more like 1968.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)If Sanders felt he needed to have the rules changed on his behalf to help him, he didn't have much of a case to begin with.
Sancho
(9,070 posts)Obama used the delegate process strategically to win in 2008!
There are rules of the game, and there are good reasons for super delegates. Look back at the mess of 1968 and also the mess that the GOP has now.
Sometimes things need to be changed, but not just because your candidate isn't winning. Frankly, Hillary is beating Bernie so badly now that no change in the system would make a difference in 2016.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)4 unpledged. 38 Sanders. 28 Clinton, plus 9 pledged superdelegates (37 so far)!
So, multiple reliable sources! A 'virtual tie' is a win!
8 out of 11? That WAS a Super Tuesday!
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/D-PU.phtml Mineral Man!
Cha
(297,240 posts)37 to 38?
How does that work, yallerdawg? Depending on what counties she won in? Help me understand? lol
Colorado is my home state!
MM!
Some caveats: No delegates will be settled completely until the state convention. The delegate proportion also may change because delegates to county conventions are not bound and may change sides.
Then, throw in superdelegates who are generally the "party faithful" who can vote for the best candidate regardless of the whims of the electorate.
The estimated apportionment of caucus voting was 38-28 for BS, plus an additional 9 superdelegates pledged to Hillary (making 37 total, so far).
I hope that helps clarify it.
Cha
(297,240 posts)Thank you so much!
Hillary and her supporters had to deal with this in 2008.. now sanders and his supporters have to live with the rules.
And I don't recall when we didn't hear this 2,000 plus number to win during the primaries - not just at the convention!
And if superdelegates had to vote the same as the state vote, then what difference would it make and why have them?
Democracy and majority rule is not always what it's cracked up to be.
Remember when Proposition 8 banned same-sex marriage - in California? There's your democracy.
vdogg
(1,384 posts)Are they counting Super Delegates?
vdogg
(1,384 posts)We're ahead overall in delegates and Bernie is not gonna make up that lead. Really no need to add supers to that total. Just stirs up the hornets nest.
Last edited Thu Mar 3, 2016, 12:19 AM - Edit history (1)
This is not the Republican primary, we only have two candidates.
One of the two is going to go over the 50%+1 finish line (hint, it's Clinton). We have no need to even discuss the superdelegates because they won't be necessary.
jsmirman
(4,507 posts)this is unnecessarily divisive stuff.
Cha
(297,240 posts)his supporters have to live with them in 2016.
And, ah ha! Colorado is my home state! Great news. thank you, DD!
otohara
(24,135 posts)to Canada - there's weed up there too!
Kidding aside the kids came out in droves last night. Channel 7 did a story on the long lines in Boulder and many were turned away.
We spent more than 3 hours at caucus, some people left. It was chaos and no one is happy - the Dem party chair boasted on Twitter that 120,000 turned out. That is nothing to cheer about - I'm starting a change.org petition to get back the primary. I have a feeling others will do the same.
For a party that touts the right to vote - this system disenfranchises a whole lot of people.
Cha
(297,240 posts)Primary would be better I think.. Mahalo!
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)I am for changing these rules, but not midway through the game. Rules are rules. The Sanders team should have expressed their objections years ago.
By all means I am in favor of amending DNC rules to dimminish the role of superdelegates, for the 2020 cycle.
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Gov. John Hickenlooper (one of the superdelegates):
"I endorsed Hillary Clinton because I think of all the candidates in both parties, she is by a large margin the most qualified to come in and be president on Day 1," he told The Post through a spokeswoman. "I appreciate the intense attraction that Sen. Sanders has for many, but my support for Secretary Clinton has never wavered."