Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammonitida (Post 11198565)
So just let Bernie roll over Hillary in these caucus states with more 70-20 landslides, erasing her lead, while banking on California (50-50), New York, and PA to bail her out? That doesn't sound like a good strategy.
Just how many delegates do the rest of these caucus states have? Couldn't winning the rest of the caucus states by 70-20 wipe out any of Hillary's predicted wins in those three states? |
Remaining Caucus States: Wyoming, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, North Dakota... Total 132 delegates if he takes 100%. He won't, but assume Alaska-like figures if you wish... 80% = 105 Sanders : 27 Hillary.
That's about the lunch-time allocation in New York. His requirement after today may have shifted slightly from needing 2/3 of the delegates remaining, but not by much. When the dust settles, the bottom line is that they need to flat out win, win, win. And WIN BIG in some states with a decent delegate count. So far, that's MI and WA. In fact, Bernie's got more delegates from the accumulated states he's lost in than he does in the winners.
Momentum? It will mean something going into WI. That's an important Dem state and he's been polling well. WY? Who cares? Truly... if I'm a Dem strategist and considering changing my support to Sanders, I don't give a rat's ass how much he swept Idaho and Montana and Oklahoma by. I care about that baker's dozen of states that the party needs to carry to retain the WH. He's won two of those (MI and WA); he's lost in FL, TX, VA, OH, IL, MA. "Yeah, but he was close!"
Close doesn't matter. Wins in red states don't matter. The Dems have about as much chance of taking Utah and Oklahoma as I have of winning Miss America. When the numbers are finalized at the end of today, Clinton's magic number is going to be around 650, I think. That's the number of delegates she needs to pick up of the remaining 2073, but we'll have to wait to see the final allocation of delegates from today. If it's 660 or 670, it's not much of a difference. It's a very small number.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1SeRuFl
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire