WHAT

THEY ARE NOT TELLING YOU ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES

and other musings...

Super delegates:

During the convention they can vote for whomever they want, this seems to be somewhat more common knowledge now but what isn't as well know is the fact that this is the first time in the democratic primary where Super delegates are included in with the pledged delegate totals giving a false impression to the casual observer about how the race is going. So the question becomes, why? Why is that so? If you don't think having Clinton as a last name has something to do with it I don't think you really understand just how long the arms of the Clinton political machine are. Why is the fact that super delegates are being reported along with pledged delegates not even a story?

The DNC:

They are doing exactly what I have long despised the Republican Party for, putting loyalty to the party over whats best for the country. In doing so they are taking the risk of alienating millions of young progressive voters (and therefore elections) for years to come. Sounds like a good move right? 

Inevitability:

If this race is so damn inevitable for Clinton? Why do I have to keep hearing about it? Does a guy walking down the street who has a million dollars in his bank account make sure that everyone knows he does? No, he doesn't. He knows he does, why should he feel compelled to convince anyone? "He'll be done by Nevada, He'll be done after Super Tuesday, he'll be done after March 15th, he doesn't have a path to the nomination." What have these inevitability types been right about so far?

Super Tuesday:

It's a joke. It needs to be done away with. It was designed to thwart a candidate like Sanders (or Trump) and have them finished off early so the party's eventual candidate could concentrate on the general election. Works great right? Newsflash, democrats don't need the south to win. Florida is nice to have but the fact is democrats have more paths to victory in the electoral college without it than the Republicans do. The South is red meat Republican territory. Do away with Super Tuesday and let these states decide their own primary dates and let the candidates at least pay lip service to these constituencies. It's to much area to cover in too short of time way to early on in the process. It does no good for the candidates or the voters. Ditch it.

Hillary is the better candidate:

I love this one. Really? So after a tie (for all purposes) in Iowa, and a shellacking in New Hampshire the "best candidate" pretty much panics and spends a lot more time and money on Super Tuesday races she would have won anyway? That's your better candidate? I'll take the candidate who is being more strategic in his thinking, saving up his cash (he's out raising her now) for the stretch run which will be in heavily democratic areas. It's almost like he knows she falters down the stretch. Go figure. My thinking is this was the game plan all along. Make it till after march 15th and then start chipping away at whatever lead she has. I guarantee you this, she didn't expect to be asking for money after her wins on March 15th. This is not the campaign she had envisioned. Sound familiar?

Did I mention there is on ongoing FBI investigation along with several other investigations into one of the candidates? This is no right wing hatchet job. This is the FBI! If her name wasn't Clinton and if she wasn't female, would you still support a candidate with an ongoing FBI investigation? Do you want indictments in the general election and a President Trump?

But she swept the March 15th primaries:

North Carolina and Florida were given. Why waste time and money somewhere you know you're going to lose? Missouri and Illinois might as well be ties. "But Ohio, people got scared of what happened in the Trump rally in Chicago and flocked to her in Ohio." Really? Why didn't they do the same thing in Illinois and Missouri then? The most plausible explanation for what was the biggest setback of the Sanders campaign to date is the fact that independents who supported Bernie in Michigan went to Kasich in Ohio by almost the same percentage. It was well known that a Trump loss in Ohio would in all likelihood result in a brokered Republican Convention. That wasn't the case in the Illinois and Missouri races, therefore this seems the much more likely scenario.

But Sanders needs 58% of all remaining delegates:

A friend suggested he has to win all the remaining contest and needs to just "get out of the race". Really? Seems like fair reporting would also include how he's done in his victories to date but you won't hear or see this much. Again, the question is why?

Kansas 67.7%

Maine 64.3%, 

Vermont 86.1

Colorado 59%
Minnesota 61.6%,

Nebraska 57.1. 

New Hampshire 60%

Given these numbers, it's not out of the range of possibilities although others would insist that it is. Remember, we're just now moving into heavy democratic areas.

Down the stretch:

Raising cash and campaigning at the same time is a very difficult proposition and it is exactly the one Mrs. Clinton finds herself in. Sanders is out raising her and the upcoming map is dominated by much democratic strongholds than were the earlier primaries which a majority of were in the south. In fact outside of the south? Clinton has a pledged delegate lead of 26. Why do you want to support a candidate that has built her delegate lead on a geographic area that neither her or Sanders will win in the General? The South (with the possible exceptions of Virginia and Florida) is no longer needed for a democratic victory come November. Makes sense to support the candidate that built their delegate lead there right?

Iowa-2

Ohio -17

Illinois - 1

Nevada - 5

Massachusetts -1

A twenty six delegate lead outside a geographical area that doesn't matter anymore. This is what a former Senator from New York, a former Secretary of State, former first lady, and party favorite, with a year and a half head start, all the favorable press in the world (How many "inevitability" stories have you seen compared to ones about the ongoing FBI investigation? ) while going up against an unknown, self-declared Democratic Socialist Senator from Vermont.

I honestly believe the Sanders campaign sought to prove two things, 1) that a candidate with enough small donors wouldn't need money from Super Pacs and 2) The south is no longer relevant in Democratic Presidential Primaries. He's already proved one.

If it was me? I'd rather be in Sanders shoes at the moment.