Sanders aims to win 40% in NY

[Nyvin]

The Dem primary is officially over -

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/bernie-and-hillary-prep-for-new-york-clash-221321

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The "goal" of the Sanders campaign is to take 40% of the vote?   Sanders need to win ~66% of the vote in ALL remaining states to win a majority of delegates, what will 40% in NY make that figure?  75%?  70%?   

[Holmes]

The Sanders campaign has been having a lot of missteps lately, with saying they "didn't contest 8 states" to now saying they're hoping for 40% in New York. The second biggest delegate prize in this primary season.

[The Other Castro]

Nah but they're going to win California by 30 points don't worry.

[Ebsy]

Nah but they're going to win California by 30 points don't worry.

I don't think that would even work.

[IceSpear]

This article was painful to read. It basically implies that Hillary "needs" to win NY by 30+ points or she is doomed. Politico must be math challenged. The guy trailing by 230 delegates is the one that needs a win.

[ElectionsGuy]

He needs more like 45%, and a sweep of the rest of the states besides Maryland.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

This article was painful to read. It basically implies that Hillary "needs" to win NY by 30+ points or she is doomed. Politico must be math challenged. The guy trailing by 230 delegates is the one that needs a win.

Yeah. Hillary doesn't even have to win New York.

[Wiz in Wis]

It's pretty clear at this point that Sanders knows he's lost the pledged delegate majority. Now he's 100% spinning that abstract concepts like "where we competed" and "momentum" should override votes/delegates.

Which makes sense. Sanders has never been a credible candidate for president. This was always Ralph Nader 2.0. He just knew enough to run in the Dem primary. Now, with the nomination clearly gone mathematically, he's making purely emotional appeals to superdelegates. The same superdelegates he said were undemocratic establishment elites just a few weeks ago.

Honestly, he could have tried to save face, but I guess when you're in your mid 70s and have nothing else to lose, you can just make up nonsense and hope every one else is as senile as you are.

[IceSpear]

Nah but they're going to win California by 30 points don't worry.

I don't think that would even work.

Yeah, if he only hits 40% in NY, it would probably require a 40 point win in CA. lol

[standwrand]

tbh Bernie's entire campaign is a pyramid scheme and that's all

[Illiniwek]

Anyone who still believes Bernie could still be the nominee is smoking the ganja. I will admit that he has put up a good fight and that his support probably should signal an ideological shift. But that doesn't change the fact that this race is OVER. I look forward to a Bernie-successor's campaign in 2020 or hopefully 2024.

[°Leprechaun]

He needs more like 45%, and a sweep of the rest of the states besides Maryland.

Right.

Hello people! He is keeping expectations low. Did not that occur to any of you? Am I the only one who understands the "keep expectations low" strategy? If he gets 40% or more,
he can still argue that he is viable. Of course, unless Clinton wins 2383 elected delegates, which may be unlikely at this point, Sanders can stay in until the Convention and fight for
as many super delegates as he would need, not that he would likely be able to win the nomination. If he doesn't get 50%+1 of the elected delegates he will have a strong argument for his legitimate right, but if the super delegates swing against either Sanders (or Clinton) and give the nomination to the candidate with less than a majority, things could get very ugly. It makes sense that Sanders is fighting for super delegates; it is an attempt to level the playing field. If it's fair for 2/3 of the super delegates to endorse Clinton with utter contempt for
the will of the voters, why shouldn't Sanders fight back? DUH! If you think that it is ok for the super delegates to ignore the will of the people you are supporting oligarchy.
Since the establishment elitists don't care about letting the voters decide, they are bringing this on themselves. Sanders has no choice but to work within the system, Clinton has
already poisoned the well. The Democratic party is not democratic, so it is only fair for Sanders to do what he is doing to level the playing field, even though he will, in the end,
be unsuccessful. The person who wins the majority of elected delegates should get the nomination. Clinton will if she gets a majority of elected delegates, Sanders might not,
creating an even greater split between the two wings of the party.

This will all be moot if Sanders can't get a majority of the elected delegates, which happens if he doesn't have some game changing victories. If he loses all five states on April 26th, his prospects will be grim, although he will still likely have a mathematical chance to win the nomination.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

This will all be moot if Sanders can't get a majority of the elected delegates, which happens if he doesn't have some game changing victories. If he loses all five states on April 26th, his prospects will be grim, although he will still likely have a mathematical chance to win the nomination.

You know, John McCain had a mathematical chance to win the 2008 election after Obama was projected to carry Ohio, but before polls closed on the west coast.

[°Leprechaun]

Anyone who still believes Bernie could still be the nominee is smoking the ganja. I will admit that he has put up a good fight and that his support probably should signal an ideological shift. But that doesn't change the fact that this race is OVER. I look forward to a Bernie-successor's campaign in 2020 or hopefully 2024.

Not really, we haven't even reached the half way point. This isn't a football game with a few hours remaining, there is a lot of time for Sanders to win this. Do I think he will? No, I am not saying that, only that we don't know and won't know for quite a while.
He has been steadily rising and will continue to rise. Will he excelerate his "momentum"; nobody really knows. If you can predict the future with accuracy, then please predict the powerball numbers, buy a ticket and I will believe you.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

He has been steadily rising and will continue to rise. Will he excelerate his "momentum"; nobody really knows. If you can predict the future with accuracy, then please predict the powerball numbers, buy a ticket and I will believe you.

Yes, but can he actually overcome his deficit? I mean actually, not "mathematically it's possible".

Don't take me wrong; I've been for Sanders all along, but I really can't see his path for the nomination barring a freak occurence such as Hillary drooping dead or getting indicted.

[°Leprechaun]

This will all be moot if Sanders can't get a majority of the elected delegates, which happens if he doesn't have some game changing victories. If he loses all five states on April 26th, his prospects will be grim, although he will still likely have a mathematical chance to win the nomination.

You know, John McCain had a mathematical chance to win the 2008 election after Obama was projected to carry Ohio, but before polls closed on the west coast.

That's different, he had run out of time. Sanders still has time to close this. I am not making any predictions, I am just being "conservative"; nobody really knows with 100% certainty.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. The more votes Sanders get the better, whether he wins or loses. Predicting gloom and doom only subverts the democratic process, discouraging his supporters from voting. If it's over fine. Clinton supporters please stay home, because your vote doesn't matter.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'll say it again: the Sanders campaign has become a racket that aims to fill the pockets of Tad Devine and the other Beltway insiders working for him with money coming from gullible college kids and loony lefties like Susan Sarandon.

[°Leprechaun]

He has been steadily rising and will continue to rise. Will he excelerate his "momentum"; nobody really knows. If you can predict the future with accuracy, then please predict the powerball numbers, buy a ticket and I will believe you.

Yes, but can he actually overcome his deficit? I mean actually, not "mathematically it's possible".

Don't take me wrong; I've been for Sanders all along, but I really can't see his path for the nomination barring a freak occurence such as Hillary drooping dead or getting indicted.

Simply put, by encouraging people to vote for him. I realize that he is far enough behind to make it look impossible, but many things that look impossible (just the fact that he is still in this, for example, who would have guessed that three months ago? Certainly not I), happen and in hindsight nobody would have predicted them. If he falls further and further behind in April and May, I can see myself changing my tune. I just don't think predictions matter. Everyone who wants him should vote for him, no matter what his odds are. I realize that it is fun to make predictions, but predictions don't always come out the way you expect. How often do people who predict the weather make predictions that are far from what actually happens?

[°Leprechaun]

I'll say it again: the Sanders campaign has become a racket that aims to fill the pockets of Tad Devine and the other Beltway insiders working for him with money coming from gullible college kids and loony lefties like Susan Sarandon.

Sarandon is a true freedom fighter.

[Virginiá]

Not really, we haven't even reached the half way point. This isn't a football game with a few hours remaining, there is a lot of time for Sanders to win this. Do I think he will? No, I am not saying that, only that we don't know and won't know for quite a while.
He has been steadily rising and will continue to rise. Will he excelerate his "momentum"; nobody really knows. If you can predict the future with accuracy, then please predict the powerball numbers, buy a ticket and I will believe you.

What do you think the halfway point is, though?

There are 4,051 pledged delegates. Clinton has won 1,243, while Sanders has won 975. So, 1,243 + 975 = 2218, which is over half the pledged delegates. Exactly half would be 2025.5. In terms of pledged delegates, we are clearly past the halfway point.

A quick count of the remaining contests shows 22 left, with 4 of them being Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam and Washington DC. So 18 states left, +DC and 3 territories. Once again, less than half. So unless I'm missing something, we are already in the 2nd half here.

If we want to continue entertaining the thought that Sanders can win by somehow doing something he hasn't been even remotely able to do already - That is, completely wipe out Clinton across the board from here on out, then fine. But if he doesn't win New York, then I personally hope this nonsense will stop, because at that point it's just pathetic and desperate (though arguably it is already)

[°Leprechaun]

A month from now, we'll have a better idea. People are making predictions about the future based on what has happened so far. Sanders hasn't done well enough to be looking viable to most people here. Just because he hasn't performed well in the past doesn't prove that he won't perform well in the future. I good take a guess at his odds. I could say there is a 5% chance that he could win this or a 25% chance, but what difference does it make? Whatever will be will be. If he does as well in future states as Clinton did in the conservative south he can begin to catch up and have a much better chance of winning big on June 7. People have underestimated him all along. Clinton's supporters have been saying that she was inevitable all along so, now that she has a comfortable lead, of course they are going to be overconfident. Go ahead. If she is inevitable, there is literally no reason to vote for her. Nobody really believes that.

[Figueira]

The Dem primary is officially over -

Can we please stop saying this? We were saying this after FIMNO--we need to stop crying wolf here. The primary will literally be over soon enough.

[Maxwell]

Sounds like a reasonable goal. *shrugs*

[Virginiá]

A month from now, we'll have a better idea. People are making predictions about the future based on what has happened so far. Sanders hasn't done well enough to be looking viable to most people here.

Alright, well, sure. But just to be clear here - Your argument, at least to me, is basically that "anything can happen, so lets wait and see", which is, no offense (really) a terrible argument to make for a losing candidate in an election.

Do you at least agree that based on his performances so far, and the current delegate math, that a win seems improbable unless something big happens that drastically degrades Clinton's performance/poll numbers? It's one thing to be highly optimistic, but another to deny the raw data and reality of the situation, considering politics is not completely random and there are patterns at work.

Edit: At what point do you consider Bernie's campaign no longer viable?

[°Leprechaun]

Sanders doesn't have to win NY, but he does have to do well in some states like PA, CA, and NJ. If Clinton wins big in NY that would be a big setback for Sanders. Wisconsin could change the dynamics a little if Sanders wins there, which isn't an unreasonable hope.

"What do you think the halfway point is, though?"

Well, in terms of delegates we are more than halfway. On the calendar April 8 is halfway between Feb 1 and June 14. The point of that is that there is a lot of time for Sanders to win this. Will he? He can, and therefore, there is no point in giving up. He believes in the democratic process, and there is nothing wrong with that. Why shouldn't California have as much of a voice as Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina? I know that he is behind, but that is no reason to give in to Clinton, who has, as I have pointed out been "inevitable" all along. If she wins, she wins, then it is over.