PPP: Clinton leads 10 of 12 Super Tuesday and beyond states

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

I still can't believe that Sanders has a 76 point lead. I was guessing that it would ultimately be something like 75-25, but 86-10? These are the people that know Bernie best. No wonder he got 71% in 2012. I'd love to see how well he would do if he was on the Republican ballot in NH.

[IceSpear]

I didn't realize how unrepresentative Super Tuesday States were this time around: it's basically the Confederacy!

The US primary system really is a joke.

Yup, its just as bad as how white the first two states were. They really need to make some changes.

Though Sanders is lucky IA/NH were first. If it was say...SC and TX, he'd be a footnote by now.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I still can't believe that Sanders has a 76 point lead. I was guessing that it would ultimately be something like 75-25, but 86-10? These are the people that know Bernie best. No wonder he got 71% in 2012. I'd love to see how well he would do if he was on the Republican ballot in NH.

He has an amazing 83% approval rating, the highest of any Senator in the country.

http://morningconsult.com/2015/11/bernie-sanders-is-the-most-popular-senator-in-america/

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I still can't believe that Sanders has a 76 point lead. I was guessing that it would ultimately be something like 75-25, but 86-10? These are the people that know Bernie best. No wonder he got 71% in 2012. I'd love to see how well he would do if he was on the Republican ballot in NH.

He has an amazing 83% approval rating, the highest of any Senator in the country.

http://morningconsult.com/2015/11/bernie-sanders-is-the-most-popular-senator-in-america/

Bernie could win the GOP primary as a write-in.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I still can't believe that Sanders has a 76 point lead. I was guessing that it would ultimately be something like 75-25, but 86-10? These are the people that know Bernie best. No wonder he got 71% in 2012. I'd love to see how well he would do if he was on the Republican ballot in NH.

He has an amazing 83% approval rating, the highest of any Senator in the country.

http://morningconsult.com/2015/11/bernie-sanders-is-the-most-popular-senator-in-america/

Bernie could win the GOP primary as a write-in.

I don't know why anyone would bother voting for in the Republican primary, since the primaries are open.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I didn't realize how unrepresentative Super Tuesday States were this time around: it's basically the Confederacy!

The US primary system really is a joke.

Yup, its just as bad as how white the first two states were. They really need to make some changes.

Though Sanders is lucky IA/NH were first. If it was say...SC and TX, he'd be a footnote by now.

Yes for SC, but not necessarily for TX. If step 1 to victory was a good showing in Texas, Sanders would be running a very different campaign with much more early focus on Latinos. As it is, Sanders may top 40% in Texas.

[ElectionsGuy]

I didn't realize how unrepresentative Super Tuesday States were this time around: it's basically the Confederacy!

The US primary system really is a joke.

Yup, its just as bad as how white the first two states were. They really need to make some changes.

Though Sanders is lucky IA/NH were first. If it was say...SC and TX, he'd be a footnote by now.

Yes for SC, but not necessarily for TX. If step 1 to victory was a good showing in Texas, Sanders would be running a very different campaign with much more early focus on Latinos. As it is, Sanders may top 40% in Texas.

The good thing about Texas is that there are a bunch of counties that are overwhelmingly Hispanic, and from that we can get an overall assessment about the Latino vote.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I didn't realize how unrepresentative Super Tuesday States were this time around: it's basically the Confederacy!

The US primary system really is a joke.

Yup, its just as bad as how white the first two states were. They really need to make some changes.

Though Sanders is lucky IA/NH were first. If it was say...SC and TX, he'd be a footnote by now.

Yes for SC, but not necessarily for TX. If step 1 to victory was a good showing in Texas, Sanders would be running a very different campaign with much more early focus on Latinos. As it is, Sanders may top 40% in Texas.

Um... considering the number of Universities and that in 2008, the electorate was 49% white. I'd be surprised if he didn't come close to 40% anyway.

[Ebsy]

Winning by 10+ points in Texas would result in a massive delegate advantage for Clinton simply due to the state's size and delegate apportionment.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Winning by 10+ points in Texas would result in a massive delegate advantage for Clinton simply due to the state's size and delegate apportionment.

Is Texas by CD?

No, I think it's by state senate district.

[Likely Voter]

The Sanders campaign is targeting some areas of Texas according to his campaign manager so they think there are winnable delegates. I suspect they will go after the Austin area for example. Texas accounts for 1/4 of all the ST delegates so Sanders can't just write it off.

[Gass3268]

The Sanders campaign is targeting some areas of Texas according to his campaign manager so they think there are winnable delegates. I suspect they will go after the Austin area for example. Texas accounts for 1/4 of all the ST delegates so Sanders can't just write it off.

Funny enough, the Austin CD has the most delegates.

[Xing]

The Sanders campaign is targeting some areas of Texas according to his campaign manager so they think there are winnable delegates. I suspect they will go after the Austin area for example. Texas accounts for 1/4 of all the ST delegates so Sanders can't just write it off.

He absolutely shouldn't. Even if he can't actually win there, he can't afford to lose the state by 25.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The Sanders campaign is targeting some areas of Texas according to his campaign manager so they think there are winnable delegates. I suspect they will go after the Austin area for example. Texas accounts for 1/4 of all the ST delegates so Sanders can't just write it off.

He absolutely shouldn't. Even if he can't actually win there, he can't afford to lose the state by 25.

Do we even know how much money the Sanders campaign has blown through? I'm wondering if the SC pull is strategic or necessary? I think it's both, I don't think they've money to burn with expensive media markets coming soon, plus and Sanders started the excuses on Saturday about SC. First we can't win because of the SuperPACs (obviously suggesting that people in those states are gullible... hmmm? Funny that) now it'll be because they didn't campaign fully. So the argument will be if they get 30%+ that this is a YUGE win despite SuperPAC money and a smaller presence!!!

[Mr. Morden]

Do we even know how much money the Sanders campaign has blown through?

Sanders blew through $35 million in January alone(!):

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=227862.msg4925602#msg4925602

He's spending $ at a much faster rate than Clinton (that is, a faster rate than Clinton's actual campaign...she also has the Super PAC to rely on, which he doesn't have), and it's absolutely not sustainable.

[Boston Bread]

Sanders doesn't have much time left to catch up. I don't think it's smart for Sanders to conserve since if the status quo is maintained and he gets blown out in March it will be impossible to catch up delegate wise. Overspending now and hoping something sticks is the a sensible strategy for Sanders right now.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Sanders doesn't have much time left to catch up. I don't think it's smart for Sanders to conserve since if the status quo is maintained and he gets blown out in March it will be impossible to catch up delegate wise. Overspending now and hoping something sticks is the a sensible strategy for Sanders right now.

I agree to a point. If he's only getting anaemic results... he's not going to get rewarded with increased fundraising. Things are going to be getting VERY expensive very soon. There needs to be big rewards to come from that strategy.