Could Clinton gain 2383 pledged delegates?

[lancer78]

The answer is yes.

Here are my predictions, using research from the green papers.

USVI: 4-3 Clinton

PR: 45-15 Clinton: Huge minority vote

NJ: 86-40 Clinton, Sanders will get at most 2 delgates out of each of the 20 delegate districts. Will not gain any at large or PLEO.

CA: 355-121 Clinton: These are based on latest poll numbers with Clinton getting 56% in California.

SD: 14-6 Sanders

ND: 12-6 Sanders

MT: 14-7 Sanders

NM: 22-12 Clinton

DC: 15-5 Clinton: Huge AA population

Total delegates for Clinton is 546, which puts her at 2,322 pledged delegates. Which is only 61 shy of the amount needed to win a majority of all delegates. California is the big wild card. In 2008, McCain won by only 8%, but carried all but 3 counties in California. Because of this, he was rewarded 93% of the delegates. I don't think democratic rules would let Clinton get that percent, but if she got 416 Delegates out of California, then she will reach 2383.

[UMTerp01]

1. Wouldn't it be great if DC put her over?

I mean just for the irony alone. Last place to vote and she's going to absolutely DESTROY Bernie Sanders in DC.

[bravenak]

2. She does not need to reach 2383 with only pleged delegates!

I have no idea why folks are pushing this nonsense. I guess the rules change when a woman wins.

[lancer78]

3. No, she does not

thanks for making me feel sexist when that was never my intention. Clinton getting 2383 would shut a lot of people up though.

[bravenak]

5. Not directed at you

[FSogol]

4. +1. They keeping repeating "the SDs don't vote until the convention" like

some kind of mantra. The Pledged delegates don't vote until the convention either. What's the point? There will be one vote at the convention, HRC has enough to win it. Convention over except for the speeches.

[bravenak]

6. Them calling it contested really irritates

It's not contested if the winner wins on the first ballot. They need to knock it off.

[FSogol]

9. Agreed. Of course they complained about sample ballots favoring HRC, so they

seem to know little about the process.

[bravenak]

11. That was ridiculous and hilarious at the same time

[bvf]

16. "Them calling it contested really irritates"

Coming from someone who wears perpetual irrititation like other people wear clothes, that's to be expected.

Thanks for the confirmation, though, just the same.

[joshcryer]

25. Yeah, that's so dumb.

Um, nobody votes until the convention and if the loser releases their delegates they can happily vote for the victor (Clinton released her delegates in 2008 and about half voted for Obama).

[k8conant]

7. No she does not need to reach 2383 with only pledged delegates

but she would need 2383 to clinch the nomination in June.

[bravenak]

8. She will have that

[k8conant]

10. with HillaryMath??

[bravenak]

12. With superdelegates count the same math

Nobody votes until the convention. Not pledged, not supers. So if we cannot count the supers until they vote at the convention, then neither can we count the pledged delegates until the convention. If they flip to Bernie we can adjust the numbers, until then? Count them all until they switch then count again to make sure. It will be called the second she hits 2383, regardless of this brand new rule that y'all made up this year.

[k8conant]

17. What brand new rule?

[bravenak]

18. That her majority has to come from pleged delegates only

[k8conant]

20. We never said that..

we just said that she won't have clinched the nomination until she has 2383 delegates and she won't be able to do that with pledged delegates alone. (See post #14)

[bravenak]

21. But she will have clinched it

All is over but the paperwork. No way she loses on the first ballot. And yes, many have said just that.

[k8conant]

22. So sh*t then do the paperwork...

[bravenak]

23. We will

[PATRICK]

30. As a Sanders supporter

it seems the heat is off the supers if only a fraction of them are needed to decide in favor of Hillary and the ganging up argument is rendered pretty much moot. At least as far as that one night's balloting is concerned. The forlorn hope by this point is that big blows could still be delivered in the final states to return to this issue.

The problem continues that the supers are clearly majority anti-Sanders even should Hillary mysteriously vanish. Since the party put its collective thumb on the scales for a candidate they never meant to compete in an actual primary series it will continue to take the heat for unfairness unless it acknowledges the opposition and its positions. Or explain why it must blow off the opportunity of gathering in the enthusiasm of those voters. Or why they would risk electing Trump rather than uncover their ears to a Better Deal.

Make it more negotiation than unconditional surrender, for example. Some encouraging steps have been taken in that process.

[imagine2015]

14. Bernie or Clinton need to reach 2383 delegates. It's not an anti-Hillary sexist rule.

Neither Bernie nor Clinton will achieve that total via elected pledged delegates. That's why the super delegates will decide who the Democratic candidate will be.

Any questions?

[bravenak]

15. Exactly. And they pick HER

[bvf]

24. "It's not an anti-Hillary sexist rule."

It is to the sort of person who uses terms like "sexism" and "racism" like nerf bludgeons, taking time out only to post hate-filled, anti-semitic rants on other websites.

[Lizzie Poppet]

37. Oh, but that's okay! Because reasons.

Still worth keeping off my Ignore list...unintentional comedy is best comedy.

[barrow-wight]

29. Thank you for returning.

Now people can stop saying I'm you. LOL

[bravenak]

31. Lol

No prob. Too many conspiracy theories these days

[barrow-wight]

32. You aren't kidding. :-D

[Eric J in MN]

13. Why are you figuring she'll do much better in NJ

...than she did in NY?

She was a US Senator from NY. Also, NJ lets Independents vote and NY doesn't.

[oberliner]

33. New Jersey has closed primaries

Only registered Democrats can vote in the NJ Democratic primary.

[Eric J in MN]

34. I was mistaken based on Wikipedia using the term 'semi-closed' for New Jersey.

For most states, Wikipedia uses that term when Independents are allowed to vote in Democratic primaries but not Republicans.

For New Jersey, apparently they use that term because:

"You can declare your party affiliation at the polls when you go to vote in your first Primary Election. After that, you may change your party affiliation 55 days before a primary election."

http://canivote.mytimetovote.com/new_jersey.html#primary

[oberliner]

35. No problem

I got my info from VoteforBernie.org:

New Jersey has closed primaries
New Jerseyans must register as democrat to vote for Bernie! However, undeclared voters are able to change party at election ballots.

http://voteforbernie.org/state/new-jersey/

[demwing]

19. You give Clinton 3/4ths of California delegates?

Based on 56% polling? How is that supposed to work?

[joshcryer]

26. I don't think the OP is predicting that.

Just saying it's hypothetically possible.

[barrow-wight]

28. More important a question is ...

... how so many Bernie supporters believe that he's going to get 76%+ of California and the remaining states, especially based on that same 56% polling in favor of Hillary, since that is the number he has to reach just to break even with Hillary.

[Garrett78]

27. I think 2200 is more realistic.

That would give Clinton a margin of victory of about 350 pledged delegates, leaving no doubt who the nominee will be (not that there's been any reason to doubt that since mid-March).

[ISUGRADIA]

36. CA numbers off

Dem awards proportionally statewide and at the Congressional District. With 56% she'd get about 56% of the delegates more or less. See delegate numbers in TX and FL which she won 2-1.