Did Clinton do as well as expected on ST? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 09, 2024, 07:57:50 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Did Clinton do as well as expected on ST? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Did Clinton do as well as expected on ST?  (Read 4854 times)
Trapsy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 899


« on: March 02, 2016, 03:33:41 AM »

I also don't understand where is this ridiculous under-perform Obama thing is coming.Stupid logic. Obama's black votes are going entirely to Clinton, Obama won overall by 100+ Delegates & Obama did have significant Dem Support.

I did not see any results from MN or CO showing a Sanders win - The last 2 caucuses Sanders lost despite having a good chance of victory. MA Polls - Clinton was leading 5-7% in most polls recently conducted.

I was certainly surprised by almost 20% victory in MN, CO & 10 points in OK. Sanders significantly out-performed in CO, OK, MN but I think Alabama was a disaster & Texas-Virginia, etc should have been a bit better & would have given him 30 odd delegates (60 swing possibly).

Hillary did better in the Confederacy than expected but this is VERY BAD NEWS for the general as all these states will be Red States for sure.

So far, Hillary has won 3 swing states (VA/IA/NV) and Bernie has won 2 (NH/CO). Really not sure where this talking point comes from.

Last time I checked the objective was to win delegates, its a 50 state process because soooo. This red state or blue state argument is really really really bad.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.015 seconds with 11 queries.