Home | About | Donate

Clinton Delegate Lead Down to 194, Even as Dramatic Miscounting of Delegates by Media Continues


Clinton Delegate Lead Down to 194, Even as Dramatic Miscounting of Delegates by Media Continues

Seth Abramson

1,299 to 1,105.

That’s the “insurmountable” delegate lead Hillary Clinton has over Bernie Sanders.

And there are still 1,674 pledged delegates yet to be awarded in twenty primaries and caucuses to be held over the next two months; scores of up-for-grabs delegates yet to be decided via state and county Democratic conventions; and hundreds and hundreds of super-delegates to be wooed by both candidates in Philadelphia this summer — with not a single one of them having officially committed themselves to anybody.


Bernie could give the Democratic Party forty years, Clinton, four. Will the Party do the math?


Doesn't this mean if Bernie gets at least 10 more delegates per state, in the remaining 20 states than HRC, he will have the majority of the delegates? If my math is correct, that is definitely doable.


Those in power at the DNC are so corrupt with their own power they have become delusional. From what I see of the respective camps be it that for HRC or Sanders, the Sanders camp is more versed on the issues. They are opposed to HRC in great part because of the shenanigins of both the DNC itself and of the mainstream media.

When those entities both continue business as usual and if they continue these tactics they are exponentially more likely to ensure these people do not support HRC for president if she wins the nomination.

Now it still possible that the Republican Candidate for President will be so poor a choice that HRC prevails even in that contest (with a little help from the diebold count perhaps) but this would probably be the result of a very low voter turnout. This will leave a vast population of the US population seething in resentment as to what transpired.

The end result a very divided population with more demonstrations against that Government, more arrests of the same and funding for the Police State along with a greater erosion of liberties and more wars abroad , all of this so that one percent can keep the money flowing in to their bank accounts.

Given the fact that that same media is owned by something on the order of 6 major Corporations, this was inevitable. This is a very dangerous time for everyone and not just the US voter.


This was one of the more enjoyable articles that I have read in a long time. Left me smiling, it did! Go Bernie... You've got them running scared! If Bernie does well in New York it could be a tipping point against Hillary even for the worst of the pro Hillary media. It sure looks like the powers that be are noticing that the people of the USA overwhelmingly prefer Bernie despite the rigged game of the Democratic Party insiders and the media.

For the first time we notice wiggle room in the media about those super delegates when the DNC is now saying don't use them in the totals. They see what may happen and are trying to get ahead of it before the convention ends up becoming a fiasco for the party.

Yay Bernie... Your base is out there!


You left out something critical--that N.Y is a closed primary state, and that means that ONLY those registered as Democrats (or Republicans) get to vote.

About 30-35% of voters are independent and they are gravitating towards Sanders in a way that significantly tips the scales (i.e. numbers) in his direction. It's a major liability--and part of the Unfairness Nexus--that N.Y. is closed meaning all those independents who would have voted for Sanders won't get a chance to do so!

There should be uniform standards not states using all sorts of trickery to block voters that are more likely to vote Progressive. Sanders comes out way ahead in the states with open primaries.

Jim Crow keeps reincarnating and reinventing "himself."

New York could be for Lady Clinton what Florida was for Bush, the Lesser.


Mother Nature is also not being quantified in the polling places or voting booths, yet SHE is about to weigh in, big time.

In the past week, three major quakes struck--2 in Japan and one in Peru. And it's not full moon yet!

Between the Fukushima contamination and the fact that Cancers form gradually and typically don't show up for 7-15 years... and with the uptick in totally unstable climate changes (I can post the Sink hole video again, it's amazing!), lots of newly activated volcanoes, strange epidemics like what is being PINNED on a mosquito carrier... are all symptoms.

The natural world is showing human beings that there can no longer be such a thing as "business as usual."

When floods show up at faster intervals and supplies don't make it to market, the old methods of controlling citizens falter.

And by the way, you likely know about the Saudis threat to cash in many billions in U.S. treasury bond holdings... and what flux that would create in an already unstable market that is entirely built upon chimeras...

When people focus on economics without factoring in the State of Nature; or make political predictions as if the norms of yesterday will continue to apply to increasingly unstable & anomalous tomorrows... they are leaving a HUGE component out of their analyses.

Put bluntly: Shit IS hitting the air...


That series of quakes in Japan is huge as by all appearances the land over that fault is separating. The USGS survey shows the entire fault line that region has experienced multiple earthquakes.

Another 5.3 hit today a 5.5 yesterday .



I know it won't matter.... since they have 'barely' hidden motivation for NOT reporting the truth.....but I sent an email to:
CBS: 695 *
Politico: 672 *
NBC: 664 *
ABC: 244
Fox News: 244
RealClearPolitics: 244
CNN: 229
FiveThirtyEight: 206

Letting them know they are reporting inaccurate counts..... I have had to learn to ignore most corporate news sources during this campaign....Bernie or no one!


I love this fellow socialist Kshama Sawant. Like Bernie, she is the real deal. If Bernie is not cheated out of the nomination Bernie needs her in his administration along with Cynthia McKinney and Jill Stein.


The reason its called an " insurmountable lead " is HRC plays with loaded dice and will cheat to win.


As usual the media must downplay every advantage that Sanders has. Corporate America couldn't give a damn who wins the election... as long as it is NOT Bernie Sanders. The early thinking in boardrooms across America was that by April the rigged system would award Clinton the nomination before anyone really caught wind about who Bernie is. It backfired. Now it's time for Plan B.
Corporate fundamentalists felt that as long as the media ignored Sanders and instead concentrated on the usual misfits like Cruz, Trump, et al, the public would be suckered into supporting Clinton. Now that the 'Bernie Genie' is out of the bottle, the national media will concentrate on demonizing the surging populist. On the side lines corporate America will begin their avalanche of frivolous law suits (re: Ralph Nader) against Bernie, praise will be heaped upon HRC even more and of course the old "only Hillary can beat Trump" adage will be repeated ad nauseum.


Yes, and she can do it! We know because she said so and so did her daughter.
She can do IT and n such an incremental measure you would not know IT was being done.
And Trump can do IT---because billion dollar Trump told us so.

Sanders, on the other hand is telling what he will do---so now the other teams can deny the possibility.

Do IT must be done in increments and secret.
That's the key to success---------------! And big speaker fees.


I'm a die-hard Bernie fan which means I am a stickler for facts. One of the facts that you have failed to enumerate, or I just missed it, is the significance of the rules' difference between the Democratic and Republicans contests. Democratic votes are awarded proportionally (or sometimes not at all when your last name starts with an "S") and Republican contests are winner-take-all.

While I agree with your conclusions I think it was important to mention that fact. Here is why. Proportional awards on the Democratic side makes it a lot harder to make up a deficit because any candidate who polls at least 15% will see their vote count increase. At the same time, while I don't think Cruz has any chance in hell, the ability to take all the delegates in a contest would make it easier to make up a deficit.

Luckily, Arizona is the last victory the Clinton campaign will see and all of my bluster won't mean anything when Bernie gets the nomination. Madda fadda kindly disregard this letta!


Nate Silver is not a "pollster" as this article states. This fact is clear to anyone who actually reads his site, as this author clearly did not.


I am not understanding you point regarding Nader. Could you unpack it more for me? :slight_smile: Thanks


10 x 20 does not give him the majority. Let's check in after New York.


Bernie fan = stickler for facts? Nope. Interesting you should think so.


Bernie! Or ....end of the world!


Sanders chose to run as a Democrat. Nothing has been changed to disadvantage him. In fact he has benefited from Democratic Party procedures in the primaries. He could have run indpendently and not within the Democratic Party. He has the sense to know that.