Monday, April 11, 2016

It's Time For Hillary To Drop Out

By Jeff Simpson

Hillary Clinton, went further this primary season than some might have imagined at the outset, but despite her significant accomplishments, her race to the White House is over. Democrats will head into November with Bernie Sanders as their standard-bearer to face off against Donald Trump (assuming he survives an attempted coup by his party’s establishment).
In short, there is no plausible route for Clinton to overcome the momentum Sanders enjoyed with 8 straight wins. Since the former first lady leads the pledged delegate race but the lead is declining.   Unfortunately, the poorly named "super delegates" have decided that the people's voice does not matter and are trying to steal the election for Hillary Clinton.

That's just not going to happen. 
Clinton beat Sanders in the South where Democrats have not done well since Nixon.   She beat him in Florida where they have elected a person who gained his fortune by defrauding medicare. She beat him in white-dominated industrial states like Ohio but since then has taken a beating in the industrial heartland.

In caucus states, Bernie has dominated all but two, both of which leave serious doubts about who actually won.  While Caucuses might not be the most democratic process they are much more intimate where people show up who are passionate about their candidate.   It has been such a white washing in Caucuses, that the Clinton campaign and her Hillarybots keep pushing the false narrative that she is leading the popular vote.   Caucuses mean that that state does not have a primary so popular vote is not and can not be counted.   Its  misleading and meaningless and the Clinton campaign knows that!  
The problem is after performing poorly in the southern states, the Clinton campaign keeps trying to push the false meme that Mr. Sanders does not have the support of  African-Americans, Hispanics and Asians.  Blatantly false.   
The second half of the primary schedule looks far more favorable to Sanders. Caucuses in Idaho, Alaska, Hawaii, North Dakota, Wyoming and Washington should favor Sanders, as well as primaries in places like Oregon and Utah.

But he would still need to perform exceedingly well in states like New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, as more and more people hear his message and the momentum builds it can happen.   . 
While we need to eventually get rid of the ridiculous super delegate hijacking of our elections, we have to keep pointing out that the super delegates are what is making the math so hard.   They pledged early to Ms. Clinton so people who would normally support Mr. Sanders would think it is an impossibility that he gets elected and vote for Hillary.  

Disgusting how badly some people need power.

Clinton is obviously free to stay in the race so long as hier supporters keep funding her efforts, she is heading to Hong Kong soon for a fundraiser with Goldman Sachs. But no one should get angry when the rest of the party starts focusing on the Trump threat.


  1. Had to check the date to see if this was April 1, but apparently you're serious.

    Clinton has a *pledged delegate* lead larger now than Obama ever had over her in 2008, around 210 delegates. Pledged delegates right now have shit-all to do with why Sanders is behind in the delegate race, and in fact Sanders' campaign has been making noises the last two weeks about trying to swing super delegates his way because of "momentum" even though Clinton has still won more contests and is handily winning the popular vote to date.

    The national polls show her ahead or, at worst, tied with Sanders. Sanders is behind in polling in New York and other big-delegate states like Pennsylvania and California.

    Also, you totally lifted a paragraph of this from Markos's March 22 op-ed, which is why this post sounds like it was written from a past where Clinton didn't pull off an upset delegate tie over the weekend in a state Sanders was supposed to dominate.

    Is this race clearly over in one candidate's favor? No. But if you really wanted to argue that one of these candidates was likely to lose the pledged delegate race, you'd look pretty foolish saying it was Clinton.

    1. My bad, there's an error. It should read, "Super delegates have shit-all to do with why Sanders is behind in the delegate race."

  2. I lifted the whole thing from Markos because his was as ridiculous as this.

    The problem with the super delegates as I pointed out is the Hillarybots use them to show Bernie supporters there is no hope to suppress the vote.

    By the way the silliness of the primary shows in Wyoming where she tied in delegates despite an almost 60/40 split. Not sure how that is justified

    1. As a Hillary supporter, I *never* cite super delegates as a reason for Sanders to drop out or try to suppress the vote. The people who bring up super delegates are almost exclusively Sanders supporters. Clinton's pledged delegate lead, as I noted, is so massive she doesn't need the super delegates to have a commanding majority of delegates awarded so far.

      It's not the "silliness of the primary" that is the problem; it's the silliness of caucuses.

      Wyoming's caucus result was 56%-44% in county delegates, which doesn't tell us much about the actual popular vote. Some high-population counties (Natrona, Laramie) tied or went for Clinton, so she may well have had 50% or more of the actual caucus-goers who showed on Saturday--meaning a tie cheats her, not him.

      At any rate, Sanders knew the rules going in--he needed a minimum percentage to win an 8th delegate, and he couldn't get that. Clinton deserves credit for beating her expectations there. 538 projected he would win 9-5, so the 7-7 split is more worrisome for Sanders than it looks.

    2. Your point? Sanders knew the democratic party was in the tank for multinational corporate interests and this means it is OK for the democratic party to say "screw you" to the majority of voters that are now supporting Bernie when they learn who Clinton really works for?


      So your basically saying that the establishment is stealing this fair and square, Sanders knows that, so no one should talk about it.

    3. Who is "the establishment" and how are they "stealing" this election? I am not being coy. I legitimately want to understand how you see this conspiracy.

    4. BWAH HA HA HA HA!

      So you want to dismiss facts about almost 60/40 wins at the polls with 50/50 delegate counts!

      And you want to defame such facts as "consiracy" while falsely proclaiming you want to know more?!?!?


      We need better trolls here, but I bet you spend a lot of time at the evil orange site too.

    5. Okay, let's imagine a world in which the Wyoming delegates were split 8-6 in Sanders' favor. Clinton's pledged-delegate lead drops from 212 to 210.

      So, again, who is "the establishment" that is "stealing" the election for Clinton? Based on your response, I assume you must include Wyoming's Democratic Party. Who else is involved? How many more delegates have been "stolen" from Sanders to give to Clinton? (For the record, I have not been paid by Big Wyoming to post here.)

      I haven't posted to Kos in, what, a decade maybe? And I am hardly a troll. I have been blogging and writing as a progressive Democrat in Wisconsin under my own name for 14 years. Get over yourself, Mr. We the People Dane County, if that is your real name, and try offering a single fact to support your case.

  3. Yes Sanders knew the rules going in, i would guess most people do not. The bigger problem in my mind is Hillary has record negatives within her own party and now you have primaries/caucuses where bernie wins 60 percent of the vote and they tie in delegates.

    Talk about disenfranchising younger and newer voters to the party.

    If she does win she will have an uphill battle to reconcile the party and beat the Republican. I think a Hillary win brings us a President Trump.

  4. Name one state where the result was actually 60%-40% and they tied in delegates.

    1. Besides Wyoming, how about Wi?

    2. Sanders: 57% of the popular vote, 56% of the delegates (48 delegates); Clinton: 43% of the popular vote, 44% of the delegates (38 delegates). I'm not seeing how anyone "stole" Wisconsin for Clinton, or how that counts as a tie. If anyone was robbed, it Was Clinton--she won the 4th CD outright but split the 4th CD delegates with Sanders evenly.

    3. Find a story that doesn't also mention the super delegates are mostly pledged to Hillary which makes it almost a split

    4. Too funny to see hillarybots dismiss DOUBLE DIGIT sweeps -- 7 states in a row!

      Yeah, this is how democracy works -- an annointed queen that began with the advantage of having the incompetent democratic party begin the process in the slave south.

      And then the media unleashed the lie that African American's would not vote for Sanders.

      Bwah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

      Hillary is a very weak and lame candidate that is, whether you want to admit it or not, under CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

      Just insane that anyone wants to put this person forward as our presumed and pre-anointed candidate.

    5. WTPDC, this raises so many questions. Questions like, where did I dismiss Sanders' recent wins?

      Or perhaps more importantly, where did Clinton stash the time machine with which she traveled back to 1984 to start the "Super Tuesday" group primary. And why didn't she also kill baby Hitler? I guess she is just terrible after all!

      Ok, seriously, please delineate for us which Democratic constituencies don't count. Like, for example, you don't seem to want the Democrats in the South--largely the descendants of the slaves in those "slave south" states you decry--to have a say.

      It would also surprise a lot of people that you might consider states like Iowa and Massachusetts and Vermont and Colorado the "slave south." But whatever. And Clinton has had her own 7 in a row stretch ... did you think Sanders should have dropped out then? She's still won more contests, and is ahead by 2.4 million actual votes cast.

  5. kos is a republican that, coming back from Iraq, found out that GOP had no use for him. That is why he created the evil orange site and has been a turd-way clinton-style republican lite ever since.

    For years, he whined that the democratic party would not make him God and now that they have sold us out with the bankster's ideal candidate and warhawk-supreme, Hillary Clinton, kos is getting his dream of being a big cheese in the democratic party.

    But remember -- he is actually a republican that couldn't get that party to worship him as their Lord.