Sanders not running out of money: He's on track to raise 50-60 Mio. $ in March

[Shadows]

Not that it matters now - But if Clinton did not have his Super PAC dumping millions of dollars in ads in crucial states, these things would then matter.

It's practically over & Clinton sits on like 100M money from her corporate masters (read - Super Pacs)

[Shadows]

Not that it matters now - But if Clinton did not have his Super PAC dumping millions of dollars in ads in crucial states, these things would then matter.

It's practically over & Clinton sits on like 100M money from her corporate masters (read - Super Pacs)

Clinton's Super PAC has barely spent anything on the primary. Meanwhile, between Sanders astronomical ad spending (not sure why his supporters are okay with him redistributing so much money from poor college kids to ad agencies and media corporations...) and the millions of dollars in pro-Sanders/anti-Clinton Super PAC spending he's benefiting from, he's outspent her in most states.

You can't lie your way to everything & make BS statements. Clinton had an advantage & raised more than 50M$ by the time Bernie started serious fund raising.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/election-2016-campaign-money-race.html

NY Times on Feb 20th - Her Super PAC already send 13M$ + on the campaign.

After that they pumped in 5M $ in March 15th states, almost 1M in each state

The group intends to let its ongoing ad buy in Arizona — which will vote on March 22 — play out, but it will cease pumping resources into the upcoming Democratic primary contests after spending over $5 million in February and March, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
Story Continued Below
...................
The group has invested roughly $140,000 on digital ads in Arizona — a state where Sanders’ team believes he can compete against Clinton -- but not in any other states with primaries or caucuses in the coming weeks.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/hillary-clinton-primary-super-pac-220897#ixzz43NFolY8Q
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

They have spend close to 20M to defeat Sanders till now. Despite the assertion that Super Pacs won't be used in primaries - So when they got out-raised they used this.

Now that you have been proven as a lier, change your name to "Fraud Lief/whatever"

[Shadows]

Wow this forum hates Bernie even more then Washington does.

The guy couldn't do it in the south. He couldn't do it in the upper Midwest aside from a fluke in Michigan. His appeal is limited to caucus states, parts of the northeast, and Dixiecrats who always vote R in the general. He has no winning coalition and needs to drop out if he cares about stopping Donald Drumpf.

Ok David Brock. Unfortunately for you he is not dropping out anytime soon. I don't know how staying in the race is going to hurt the Democrats chances against Drumpf, all I know is Democratic turnout will probably be super low with Hillary as the nominee. Even though people are voting for Clinton they like Sanders as well. (Not as much hate as this forum)

Really? The same Hilary that's consistently winning the Democratic primary vote as Sanders wins independent voters? Good call!

Man you Sandernistas are the worst. My father is one of you and you're truly naive enough to believe that your Socialist leader is going to come anywhere near the oval office. Newsflash! He's got higher favorability because no one knows anything about him yet. Just wait until the GOP slime machine finds out Bernie once kicked a kitten while having an affair with his maid while under the influence of LSD in the 1980s.

Ridiculous points - Your father is a smart guy, unfortunately you aren't. I would stand instead of Hillary & get her votes if the party & Obama was behind me. Any Joe can.

Hillary's voters are the core Dem base.

Who are the one's driving a higher turnout?

Independents who have no obligation to vote
Young people (20%) of whom vote

Independents are the largest voting bloc & unaffiliated - Whoever gets them wins - No1 can & has won without independents. If you add 85% odd of youth voters support, strong cross-over support, Sanders is a very strong GE candidate.

Also, Hillary has been barely vetted in this cycle - She is the scandalized candidate - Her Clinton foundation is a storehouse of corruption - She is under FBI Investigation - She acted irresponsibly in that email thing - She destroyed Libya & completely destroyed that country.

What is her experience as SOS? Destroying Libya? She can't even talk about experience when she did one of the worst jobs ever.

You can add Monica Lewinsky & the many woman Bill had issues with - Someone of them are attending Rallies of Trump & want to campaign against Clinton. You will have videos of these people playing.

Elizabeth Warren already detailed Hillary Clinton being bought & switching votes in the bankruptcy bill - "The Self-funded" Trump will be playing those videos time & again.

Trust me, Hillary has so many skeletons & has been completely protected. That email thing, coupled up with Libya would have destroyed the political career of anyone else!

[Shadows]

Not on the Democratic side. Despite what you may believe, there has been little to nothing revolutionary about this primary battle.

If Sanders breaks the record of highest individual donations that is a revolution.

He brought a completely different progressive agenda which no1 thought was possible.

The fact that he is above 40% in almost all National polls & winning the young votes with 80%+ among them & the under 45 votes in most states show  - The future of the Dem party belongs to them.

Competing against Hillary effing Clinton & her Super Pac & coming this far without a Super pac through small scale donations while changing the political direction is to me revolutionary.

I think mathematically Sanders may have a chance but realistically he does not. 300+ is too much.

But Sanders has completely changed politics to me & created the space for Progressives Presidents for years to come. It will set up 2020,2024 & so on & will make a reversal from the Reagan area.

Ofcourse blind hillary hacks will barely have the competence to accept that!

[Shadows]

Let's DISPEL the MYTH that Clinton is inevitable, once and for all.
Sanders can win if people vote for him. Remember Clinton supporters have been saying that she was inevitable before the first vote was even cast. There are millions and millions of people who have not voted. Clinton supporters know that she is not inevitable, if they believed otherwise they would stay home and not vote in the primaries. They will not do that, because in their hearts they know they're wrong.

Well, it doesn't look like he's going to win Arizona (or not by much at best), and he won't win in New York. In fact, he'd be lucky to lose only in a mini-landslide instead of a massive one.

The math here just doesn't add up. Impossible to deny this.

I agree with you but there has no poll in NY giving Clinton more than 20% lead & that a while back - Sanders makes a lot compared to the early polls. I don't see him winning NY & I don't see over-turning 300 but there is no basis for a NY Landslide for Clinton as of yet!

[Shadows]

It really just goes to show that money has its limits.  Jeb Bush's 100 million dollar Superpac couldn't save his campaign because of fundamental flaws with the candidate and the messaging.

Similarly, Sanders still loses states like Massachusetts and Missouri despite outspending her 2:1 or 3:1.  It's not because money is worthless (after all, the spending definitely has buoyed his campaign), it's just that his appeal as a candidate is limited in a way that no amount of money can overcome.

This is BS - Hillary spend almost the same amount of money as Sanders in those Sanders - Sanders narrowly out-spend her.

However I dunno if this includes Hillary's Super Pac spending - Name recognition, Bill Clinton campaigning & the entire Democratic Establishment campaigning for Hillary in Massachusetts.

If Missouri & Mass would have been solo contests or with 1 other state, Sanders would have got a convincing victory. With 5 states or 11 states, Sanders has limited time to campaign.

Super Tuesday's are meant to destroy small anti-establishment candidates with limited recognition. It's a big problem & when you further add the 4th Clinton campaign here - They know the in's & out's - They have been to these states months before Sanders & have the entire establishment campaigning.

It's a no brainier - Sanders will continue to do well in the future in when limited states go for voting & he has time for campaigning - Which is why in a NY I expect him to do better than say New Jersey!