CA-NBC/WSJ: Clinton +2

[psychprofessor]

I don't get it...Sanders needed to win this state 80/20 to put a dent in the pledged delegate lead. Who cares about who wins the state at this point? It always has been about delegates and Clinton will secure the nomination after polls close in NJ.

There will be no more rallies after next Tuesday. Sanders needs to consider this: if he damages the Democratic party by continuing his campaign, I wouldn't be shocked to see someone challenge him in 2018. I also wouldn't be shocked, if the Democrats re-take the Senate, to see them marginalize Sanders and treat him as an Independent.

He was given the opportunity to run as a Democrat. He has, and he has lost. If he continues this campaign after Tuesday it will say more about his ego than his principles.

If Sanders truly cared about the Democratic party, defeating Trump and solidifying his legacy, he will concede the race on Tuesday night or Wednesday and wholeheartedly throw his support behind Hillary.

[psychprofessor]

Sanders desperately needs symbolic victories because he can't win actual ones.

The states of AK, HI, WA, OR, ID, UT, WY, CO, NE, KS, OK, MN, WI, MI, IN, WV, RI, VT, NH, and ME all say hi. I mean, yeah, he's not winning the nomination, and narrowly winning CA wouldn't change that, but let's not pretend that Sanders has done nothing.

Do you mind telling Bernie and Jeff Weaver this?

[psychprofessor]

Sanders needs to consider this: if he damages the Democratic party by continuing his campaign, I wouldn't be shocked to see someone challenge him in 2018.

And win like 5% of the vote.

Hmm, I wouldn't be so sure. If Sanders does damage to Clinton and somehow hands Trump the presidency, I think a lot of Democrats would be on board behind the scenes to take out Bernie in Vermont.