2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumCharles M. Blow: What is Sanders's Endgame?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/opinion/campaign-stops/what-is-sanderss-endgame.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=1By Charles M. Blow

Hillary Clintons commanding victory in New York on Tuesday put yet another nail in the coffin of Bernie Sanderss candidacy.
As The Upshots Nate Cohn put it:
New York, like every contest at this stage, was a state he needed to win. The result confirms that he is on track to lose the pledged delegate race and therefore the nomination.
At this pace, Clinton will finish this nomination cycle having won more votes, more states and more pledged delegates than Sanders. Furthermore, Clinton has also won six of the nine general election swing states that The New York Times listed in 2012.
And yet Sanders soldiers on, as is his right.
But Tuesday, Sanderss campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, told MSNBC that if Clinton doesnt clinch the nomination by pledged delegates alone, even if she has won the most popular votes, pledged delegates and states, Sanders will still take his fight to the convention. Sanders will absolutely try to turn superdelegates, who overwhelmingly support Clinton, and win the nomination that way.
First, barring something unforeseen and unimaginable, there is no way I can see that this strategy stands a gnats chance in hell of coming to fruition. Its a fairy tale written in pixie dust.
(More in link)

Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)pat_k
(10,887 posts)... but "voter sentiment" in July may not be reflected by the allocation of pledged delegates.
What if one of the candidates were suddenly embroiled in some kind of scandal? In that event, "voter sentiment" would be calling for SDs to nominate the untainted candidate, even if that candidate had fewer pledged delegates.
Or if it became clear that the process for allocating delegates in a state was corrupt, then "voter sentiment" would be calling for SDs to weigh in and cancel out the effect.
I'm not saying either of these things are on the horizon, but shit happens.
The way I read it, Sanders is making his case to the voters first. If it becomes clear that "voter sentiment" in July looks a lot different from the "sentiment" expressed by the pledged delegate allocation, any superdelegates who choose to align themselves with voter sentiment as they see it in July are doing the right thing.
Sticking to a "pledged delegate total or bust" position regardless of how conditions change is as unreasonable as sticking to a "bernie or bust" position regardless of how conditions change.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)and being investigated. Cheaters never win, unless the Supreme Court helps them.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)An Indictment may not be likely, but it's decidedly not beyond the realm of human foresight & imagination.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)And ... if he does continue along these lines, he'll return to the Senate with a persona-non-grata status. "No committees for you! No chairmanships for you! Just sit down and shut up while we try to repair the damage you've done to our party." is what passers-by will likely hear echoing down the corridors of Congress.
angstlessk
(11,862 posts)but just for themselves...and who they can buy!
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)To crash and bern.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Failing that, to force the DNC and the HRC campaign to acknowledge the priorities of his tens of millions of supporters.
... And to stay in the race, on on her metaphorical bumper in case she drives off a cliff. Again.
With 1400 delegates yet to be decided, he's doing the right thing. Clinton supporters are doing the right thing by their candidate too, by hysterically demanding that the neck-and-neck competition concede.
That might have made sense in '08. Because Clinton wasn't really articulating any kind of mission or cause - her only goal was personally winning the nomination, there wasn't any other agenda.