Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree. It's not that simple. Sanders supporters talked about name recognition when they explained why Hillary was more popular when the race began. Yet now they fail to mention that nobody really knows much about Bernie when they say he's polling better. Maybe that's because he hasn't been attacked for decades. Bill Clinton was elected Governor of Arkansas in 1978 and Hillary has been in the spotlight for nearly 40 years. During the Republican debates, all the candidates mentioned Hillary at one time or another. I don't recall any of them criticizing Bernie, do you?
But the polls that say Sanders is beating Trump in lots of states which Hillary does not, like AZ, GA and other red states are not unreliable. You might claim that it will change, but they are not unreliable.
Hillary benefits from being in the spotlight. Any candidate does. Even if its negative. Its Hillary, not Sanders who benefit from the GOP attacking her. Trump won because he is constantly in the spotlight. The media adores him. They might attack him but it doesnt matter. What matters is publicity, getting your name out there. There is an extremely strong correlation between media attention, national profile and votes.
Either polls are reliable or they aren't. Michigan was way off and, just before the Oregon primary, a strange poll showed Hillary ahead by double digits, although Bernie was always favored to win there. I'm actually surprised Hillary got half the vote in WV, since her campaign spent very little money in advertising over the past month.
I know Bernie supporters want him to be the nominee, but they should be more upset if he is, since the superdelegates, which he was strongly against and called them undemocratic, would be voting against the will of the people who voted. Although it will never happen, if a bunch of superdelegates suddenly decided to rely on a poll instead of nominating the candidate who received the most pledged delegates and votes, I hope every American will stand up in protest.
As a Bernie supporter, I'm 100% with you on that. I figured Hillary would win the Democratic nomination all along (at least this cycle), because she has the name recognition. It's like a local mom-and-pop trying to compete with Walmart when they're in the same town.
However, I still want him to keep his promise and stick it out until the end, as I will be voting for him here in CA. I also think the entire election process is an inefficient mess that doesn't prioritize fairness.
* Have anyone able to vote at any time from a set time frame, say from February 1 to June 1.
* Use the available technology to allow online voting, for either party they wish (but only one).
* Calculate the majority in the end. No more delegates. No more superdelegates. Just votes.
Those were counties where Bernie won, not Hillary. In the counties where Hillary won, the percent of uncommitted were very low. These are voters who aren't voting for a Dem in November regardless of which one, but unlike WV, they had the option to vote uncommitted and they took it because they didn't want to vote for Bernie or Hillary.
As for why, it was discussed upthread - it's racism. These votes when to Hillary in 2008 because they were anti-Obama votes. Now that Hillary has run on continuing the Obama policies and on his legacy, she's not getting those votes.
Republicans in Kentucky voted caucus style on March 5. Trump carried all of the precincts in East Kentucky except for Breathitt. Sanders did not carry all of the counties in the East. Four went for Clinton.
I don't know if it's right to compare caucus vs primary results, though.
I think (but am not sure), they had until Dec 31 to switch parties.
My impression was they wanted to vote for Democrats down-ticket so they stayed Democrats in those Eastern Kentucky precincts or more likely, they didn't make up their mind to vote uncommitted until the brouhaha in West Virginia. In other words, they broke for Trump after it was too late to do so.
Do you actually have nothing better to do than posting anti Hilary rants all the time? I'm actually going to laugh my nuts off if she wins. You will be stewing good if that happens
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
