Pres. Barack Obama(D-IL) - 50.2%
Sen. Bernie Sanders(I-VT) - 45.7%
362: Gov. Chris Christie(R-NJ)/Sen. Marco Rubio(R-FL) - 53.6%
176: Pres. Barack Obama(D-IL)/Fmr. Gov. Martin O'Malley(D-MD) - 45.3%
Sanders gives a lackluster speech but officially endorses Obama. He does not campaign with Obama, nor do any of the other ten most leftist Senators nor most of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Christie had easily wrapped up the nomination with New Hampshire and Nevada dealing a one-two punch, with Rubio winning MS, AL, SC, GA, and Florida to place third. Rand Paul came in second, but only won Iowa, Missouri, Kentucky, and winning the delegates in Indiana. Christie let Paul give the keynote speech, which rallied libertarians to Christie. Rubio managed to help rally the rest of the Tea Party and Christie secured moderates without alienating conservatives. The Democratic Convention came off poorly, and Christie hit the ground running with a six point lead. He held it for a really, really long time and eviscerated Obama in a friendly but aggressive manner at the debates, while Rubio absolutely crushed O'Malley. However, polling narrowed from what was supposed to be a twelve point lead to closer to eight.
Few problems
1) why would sanders do better than he's doing against Hilary? Obama has very little of hillary's issues with young voters. More to the point, I highly doubt he'd run against an incumbent.
2) 'friendly but aggressive' - wtf does that mean? Sounds vaguely sexual, which is never what you want associated with Chris Christie
3) O'Malley vs Rubio would be the most boring thing on the planet. The only things being 'crushed' would be TV execs dreams of good ratings.
4) the RNC can be a bit dumb, but even they aren't going to put some low energy loser like Rand Paul in a prominent position to capture the - like - ten voters that he would pick up in an election characterised by national security issues.
5) why would Barack ditch biden for some loser nobody likes?
Poll
