Sanders Won First Two States in Primary Contest Yet Trails Clinton 394 to 44 Delegates?

by Scott Creighton

How does that happen?

Let’s make this clear right off the bat: Sanders won the Iowa caucus and the co-chair of the Iowa Democratic Party, a woman who headed up Hillary’s campaign in that state back in 2008 and hates Bernie’s single-payer healthcare plan, stole the state for her hero, Hillary Clinton. That’s a fact. Get used to it.

So yes, Bernie actually won the first two states in the race for the Democratic Party nomination and may be poised to win the Nevada caucus if Hillary’s desperation “push polling” move is any indication.

Yet, Bernie trails Hillary in the delegate count right now by an astronomical percentage. How the hell does that happen?

Oh yeah… superdelegates.


According to this page, there are 712 superdelegates who get to take a seat at the convention and cast their votes along with all the elected delegates who’s presence depends of the will of the people. They are all party insiders (governors, party chair people, congressmen and DNC members) who get a single delegate vote to go along with whatever vote they cast at their designated polling location.

Right now, according to the Wiki page, 410 have pledged to Killary Clinton as opposed to 14 for Sanders. If accurate that would mean the count right now after Bernie won two states is 442 to 50 in favor of Hillary the loser.

A candidate needs 2,383 delegates in order to win the Democratic nomination. That means the political insiders contribute about 30% of the votes needed to secure the nomination of a candidate.

Here is a list of the Democratic Primary events of 2016. You’ll notice not one single state has as many committed delegates as there are superdelegates and in most cases, there are only about 30 or 40 compared to the 712 votes that insiders get to cast.

Is it possible for the Democratic Party to make it any clearer that they don’t give a shit about what the day-to-day rabble of their own party wants when it comes to selecting a nominee to represent them as a candidate for the presidency of the United States?

I guess when you represent the party of social equality and justice and you actually serve the neoliberal neocon agenda, you need something to tip the scales in favor of the Business Class. Can’t have the unwashed masses electing a socialist or something like that. Could be bad for business (and donations?)

And don’t forget, the majority of the minorities vote Democrat. Can’t have them effecting “CHANGE” now can we?

Anyway, the superdelegates are supposedly free to change their minds at any time prior to or during the Democratic National Convention so it’s hard to say exactly where Bernie and the will of the people really stand right now. But a number of political insiders have taken the time to declare their support for Killary in spite of the fact (and maybe BECAUSE OF THE FACT) that she is getting her elitist ass kicked by a socialist right now. My guess is, the more she loses support of the people, the more superdelegates will commit to backing her.

Hell of a democracy we have here in the Shining City on the Hill, now isn’t it?

7 Responses

  1. I should have known there’d be something like this, back in the way back there, under the rug, lurking.

    I hope Bernie knows, has a plan

    • Bernie’s plan seems to be stay on message no matter what. And that’s why I’m voting for him. He doesn’t let anything get in the way of talking about what forces are hurting this nation and this world. I hope he stays the course and keeps a light shining on Wall St. no matter how badly he gets attacked.

  2. Ha, Bernie Sanders knows his role; do the job for Hillary!

  3. Completely off topic, but ……

    • interesting but his interpretation is wrong. The “spring” did start in some of the most repressive, tyrannical states: Tunisia under Ben Ali and Egypt under the rule of our puppet Hosni Mubarak. What Assad is saying is that what happened in his country was not an Arab Spring uprising but instead a color revolution someone came up with figuring they could use the Arab Spring as cover. When he says it should have started in countries that oppose Syria because those countries are repressive dictatorships, he’s obviously talking about Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Jordan. In fact, Spring uprisings did begin around that time, after Tunisia and Egypt, in all of those countries, but they were violently suppressed. In fact, Qatar actually brought Saudi troops in to crush the revolution. With the exception of Jordan, these were all covered a little by even the MSM at the time. Jordan, if memory serves, even undertook some small concessions which seemed to quell a lot of the anger and dissatisfaction of the protesters. At the same time, I give him credit for speaking to the underlying root cause of much of the unrest remaining in the Middle East and that being the imposition of the state of Israel on the Palestinian people, the people of Lebanon and those of the Golan Heights as well as the imperialist wishes of Western states like Great Britain and the US.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: