NBC/WallSt Poll: Hillary now only leading Bern by 2 points in Cali!

[SP33Demon]

Bernie cutting into that lead in CA! Oh shit. If Bernie takes it, gonna be war at the convention.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/it-s-close-california-clinton-49-sanders-47-n584141

Hillary Clinton is clinging to a narrow two-point lead over Bernie Sanders in California ahead of the state's June 7 primary, according to results from a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll.

Clinton gets support from 49 percent of likely Democratic primary voters in the state, while Sanders gets 47 percent, which is within the survey's statistical margin of error.

After margin of error, they are in a statistical dead heat. 6 more days till the vote. Feel the Bern! Hillary one of the weakest candidates we've ever seen if she can't win Cali after holding an alleged 10 point lead after all polls are averaged (RCP).

 

[compuwiz1]

I'll be surprised if Sanders beats Clinton in Ca. Jerry "moonbatshit" Brown has endorsed her. Yeah, I live in Ca., but we have a large constituency of liberals here, who don't give a shit if they vote for a criminal.

 

[ivwshane]

You realize that Clinton will most likely get the required delegates before the California primary, right? And I'm sure your high IQ self also knows that for Hillary not to get the required delegates that Bernie would have to destroy her in California, right?

I get the feeling that politics really isn't your strong suit.

 

[SP33Demon]

You realize that Clinton will most likely get the required delegates before the California primary, right? And I'm sure your high IQ self also knows that for Hillary not to get the required delegates that Bernie would have to destroy her in California, right?

I get the feeling that politics really isn't your strong suit.

If the Bern can get more votes in Cali then the Supers will notice, and Supers can always switch for people who can really do math. That means Bern could easily win at the convention if Supers switch sides but it's stating the obvious.

 

[himkhan]

Stock up on Kleenex in anticipation of your November tears

 

[woolfe9998]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...nia_democratic_presidential_primary-5321.html

 

[alien42]

it doesn't matter, the delegates are expected to be split almost 50/50.

the math has never added up for Bernie and that's not changing.

 

[fskimospy]

Look at Obama vs Hillary in 2008.

Then realize Hillary is beating Sanders so so much worse than Obama beat Hillary.

 

[woolfe9998]

Look at Obama vs Hillary in 2008.

Then realize Hillary is beating Sanders so so much worse than Obama beat Hillary.

Yup, and then, as now, if you really wanted to make the case that Hilary was beating Obama, there were undoubtedly plenty of individual polls one could cherry pick to make the case.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Neither candidate will have enough pledged delegates to claim the nomination. The superdelegates annointed Clinton long before Sanders emerged as a viable alternative and well before her email issues escalated as a viable attack vector for the Republicans.

Sanders has every right to take his argument to the convention floor, and a CA victory lends credibility to his argument.

 

[fskimospy]

Yup, and then, as now, if you really wanted to make the case that Hilary was beating Obama, there were undoubtedly plenty of individual polls one could cherry pick to make the case.

It doesn't even matter if sanders wins California. He has to win by 20 or 30 points for it to be meaningful. I guess that's not impossible, but it is very, very unlikely.

People like OP are trying to push a narrative because they think it is advantageous as if the thoughts of people on ATPN matter. It's a weird boosterism.

 

[Jhhnn]

It doesn't even matter if sanders wins California. He has to win by 20 or 30 points for it to be meaningful. I guess that's not impossible, but it is very, very unlikely.

People like OP are trying to push a narrative because they think it is advantageous as if the thoughts of people on ATPN matter. It's a weird boosterism.

They're pushing it in every corner of the internet, I'm sure, kinda like Jehovah witnesses showing up regularly on my doorstep.

 

[theeedude]

Only 2%? He needs to win by like 30% to catch up?

 

[Brainonska511]

Neither candidate will have enough pledged delegates to claim the nomination. The superdelegates annointed Clinton long before Sanders emerged as a viable alternative and well before her email issues escalated as a viable attack vector for the Republicans.

Sanders has every right to take his argument to the convention floor, and a CA victory lends credibility to his argument.

Credibility? Right... only if you discard all the other results from the primary season.

And does that claim on delegates include or exclude superdelegate numbers? If you exclude superdelegates from the entire process, then one should only need to clear 2025 delegates to have a majority (714 of the 4765 are supers, so we should subtract those from the total number of delegates if we aren't going to count them). Clinton is definitely on target to clear that amount on pledged delegates alone.

Now, if superdelegates suddenly do count, then she needs to have 2383 delegates to have a majority. But she will have that with superdelegates + pledged delegates.

Face it, sometimes you just lose.

 

[Jhhnn]

Neither candidate will have enough pledged delegates to claim the nomination. The superdelegates annointed Clinton long before Sanders emerged as a viable alternative and well before her email issues escalated as a viable attack vector for the Republicans.

Sanders has every right to take his argument to the convention floor, and a CA victory lends credibility to his argument.

The superdelegates are meaningless until they actually vote. Hillary anointed? If you mean by primary voters you'd be correct.

As you say, it's Bernie's prerogative to take it to the actual vote & to try to sway the superdelegates. It's a legit part of the process if he chooses to go that way.

 

[Brian Stirling]

It's not sufficient for Hillary to only lose by a few points and still claim victory. Yes, Bernie may need something like a 30 point win to pull even, but if Hillary loses California by even a single vote it will be really bad for her in the general.

It's amazing to me how frequently Trump has said things that would doom any other candidate and yet the odds of him being the next president are nearly 50/50.


Brian

 

[Starbuck1975]

Face it, sometimes you just lose.

Face it, Clinton is a horrible candidate. Eight years ago she was outmaneuver by a rising star with a catchy slogan and a winning coalition.

This year, she can't slay a 75 year old Socialist from
Vermont who had no national visibility prior to this election cycle.

The same as her Senate run in NY, the DNC cleared the playing field for Clinton. The superdelegates lined right up before there was even a single debate. The debate schedule even provided some level of protection for Clinton. Yet here we are.

If Sanders is to lose, it will be on the convention floor. Yes, Clinton will have more pledged delegates, but not by such an overwhelming margin that Sanders shouldn't contest the nomination. She was unable to clinch the nomination prior to the convention with pledged delegates. I understand what you are saying, but the superdelegates don't officially count in the final tally until the convention.

Under the current process, the superdelegates system exists entirely for this scenario. Where the process results in a weak general election candidate that the party power players can over turn. There are compelling reasons to consider Clinton a weak candidate.

I will say that it is somewhat hypocritical of Sanders to play the superdelegates game given his previous positions on their role in the process, but the process allows for it. Clinton held on to the last possible minute as well against Obama.

 

[fskimospy]

There is no way in hell, barring some extraordinary event, that super delegates are going to nominate Sanders. Clinton has by far the most pledged delegates and got by far the most votes. She won by a much larger margin than Obama beat her by in 2008. It's over. It's been over for a long time, in fact. After Super Tuesday Sanders was doomed but didn't appear to realize it.

 

[Brainonska511]

This year, she can't slay a 75 year old Socialist from Vermont who had no national visibility prior to this election cycle.

She has 54% of the pledged delegates at the moment. That's nearly 10% more than Sanders, in a relatively proportional system. Sounds like she's doing pretty well against the guy, definitely better than Obama did against Clinton.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I am just curious. If it is truly over as many claim and the math is insurmountable, then why did Clinton flee NJ for CA and is now canvassing the state with her husband, 30 events scheduled for the next 5 days?

 

[fskimospy]

I am just curious. If it is truly over as many claim and the math is insurmountable, then why did Clinton flee NJ for CA and is now canvassing the state with her husband, 30 events scheduled for the next 5 days?

Because it looks better for the general election if she wins California by as much as possible. There is simply not a plausible path to the nomination for Sanders and there hasn't been for a long time now. Unless you have some data that indicates he is going to win California and New Jersey by 30 points or more there isn't much worth talking about.

Superdelegates are not going to hand the nomination to the person who lost the pledged delegate count and lost the overall vote count by millions of votes. If they did that it would tear the party apart because then the system really would be rigged.

The people spoke. Clinton won. The end.

 

[K1052]

If Sanders is to lose, it will be on the convention floor. Yes, Clinton will have more pledged delegates, but not by such an overwhelming margin that Sanders shouldn't contest the nomination. She was unable to clinch the nomination prior to the convention with pledged delegates. I understand what you are saying, but the superdelegates don't officially count in the final tally until the convention.

I have yet to hear a compelling argument as to why the superdelegates will abandon Clinton for Sanders even though she got more pledged delegates and votes. The mere opinion that she is a "horrible candidate" is insufficent rationale that a party she'd been a member of for decades and her husband was elected to the presidency out of will suddenly choose to abandon her for someone who is only a Democrat out of convenience.

 

[nageov3t]

I am just curious. If it is truly over as many claim and the math is insurmountable, then why did Clinton flee NJ for CA and is now canvassing the state with her husband, 30 events scheduled for the next 5 days?

because losing CA is going to create a negative media narrative that she'd rather avoid... also, when she's up 20 in NJ and only 2 in CA, why would she keep campaigning in Jersey?

Sanders winning narrowly in California wouldn't change the race (much like Clinton winning CA in 2008 didn't spell Obama's eventual defeat), but it'd create a shitty news cycle on a day she wants to be overwhelmingly positive.

the one dark cloud for Bernie even with this poll is that most voters in CA tend to vote by mail, and I read that an estimated 1/3rd of ballots would have been mailed in back when Clinton was polling at +18

I'm taking this particular poll with a grain of salt either way, given that it's the first poll throughout the entire primary cycle that shows Clinton winning whites but losing minorities.

 

[Jhhnn]

Face it, Clinton is a horrible candidate.

As compared to... Donald Trump? Really? As compared to the raging incompetence of his Repub rivals for the nomination?

What planet are you from, anyway?

 

[Jhhnn]

I am just curious. If it is truly over as many claim and the math is insurmountable, then why did Clinton flee NJ for CA and is now canvassing the state with her husband, 30 events scheduled for the next 5 days?

"Flee"? Was it dangerous for her in NJ?