"Sanders Battles For Upset of Century"
In this February 1st article in The Hill, Bud Budowsky writes, "Make no mistake about it: If Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wins the Iowa caucuses, it will be the upset of the century, and if he wins the Democratic nomination and the presidency, it would be exactly what he says: a political revolution. The establishment members of the Democratic Party, almost without exception, support former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whom they consider to be one of them, and oppose Sanders, whom they consider a threat to their bastions of power."
The infrastructure of the Democratic Party that supports "one of them" is a nearly solid bloc from the President, whom Sanders had to visit in Washington last week to remind him that he should take a neutral stance in the presidential contest, on down through his administration, the DNC, and Congress to the governors, the state legislatures, and state committees.Caucus Results in Iowa
Be aware of this "solid bloc" that wants a very particular outcome. How much pressure was put on local Democratic officials responsible for organizing the caucuses? One wonders what role the State Party played in managing the caucuses so that Clinton could squeak out a victory?
For an example of how one precinct conducted its caucus go to:
This is a C-SPAN video of a caucus where the Clinton staffer did not do a recount at an appropriate point in the process and those in charge let her get away with it when she said that she just added the number of new people who had come into the Clinton group to the first count. The Sanders staffer, on the other hand, recounted her people as one can see in the video. This meant that her recount would have been down if people who had left her group-- for whatever reason -- and there were no new people coming into the group.
The chair of the caucus then put the recount up to a Yea/Nay vote. And awarded the majority of the delegates to Clinton.
In another example, the results that were first given out showed Clinton winning 699.57 to 695.49 but a caucus report from Precinct #42 was missing. The next day, the Des Moines Register ran an article (2/2/2016) that gave an account of how this precinct managed to follow through with the caucus process when no one appeared to officially organize it. The results showed Bernie with two more delegates than Clinton, narrowing Clinton's already slim margin -- 699.57 to 697.77.
The Sanders campaign has asked for release of the raw vote totals. Since the State Democratic Party is in Clinton's corner would there have been tolerance for shenanigans in some caucuses that shifted the vote in favor of Clinton?
Winning The Nomination
The total number of delegates at the Democratic Convention that will take place in Philadelphia from July 26th--28th will be 4763. A candidate will need 2382 votes to become the Party's nominee for president.
Since Martin O'Malley has suspended his campaign, there are currently only two candidates vying for this nomination. The Party is including in the running tally the number of SuperDelegates that have actually committed to a candidate as the campaign season gets underway. Since we know that virtually all these delegates support Hillary Clinton whether or not they have committed to vote for her as yet, her number of delegates will always exceed that for Sanders as the campaigns move along. Regardless of how many delegates have actually been won through the primary contest. We can be certain that Bernie's data folks will be keeping track of how many delegates Hillary has minus the Supers. But will the public understand what is happening?
Now"there's been a fair amount of talk about whether Sanders' supporters will vote for Hillary should she become the nominee. NO mention has been made about the Party regulars as well as Superdelegates voting for Bernie if he wins the nomination.
Mark these words: most of the SuperDelegates will not. Bernie is a threat to their status quo, to the power that is based on their own campaign contributors and their control of the legislative agenda. If they can't have Hillary, they would rather have a Republican in the Oval Office than Bernie Sanders.
1 | 2