In the nobody else has so I guess I will department, here is a thread regarding today’s primaries. All five states (CT, DE, MD, PA, RI) close at 8PM EDT. PA and MD also have closely watched Dem primaries for the US Senate. I figure for the presidency the front runners in both parties run the table. Sanders will fight to narrower gaps in the New England states than the others. Kasich will have a better night than Cruz. What say you all?
Please share widely!
Christopher says
Trump indeed swept, but Clinton has not. She has taken DE, MD, and PA. Sanders has RI and CT is to close to call. The AP is reporting that she could lose (she won’t) every remaining contest and still be the nominee. She laid on her appreciation for Sanders supporters and their issues in her speech pretty thick tonight. She also crossed the 1500 pledged delegate and 2000 overall delegate thresholds tonight.
Christopher says
n/t
dunwichdem says
In Maryland, Rep. Van Hollen beat Rep. Edwards in the Senate primary, if anyone was following that. I myself have taken a bit of interest in the primary for Maryland’s 8th congressional district. Also, in MD4, former LG Anthony Brown is slightly ahead with about a third counted. He was the defeated gubernatorial nominee in 2014.
In Pennsylvania, McGinty is ahead over Rep. Sestak, but that’s only about half-counted as of 10 PM.
dunwichdem says
McGinty won in PA.
Brown won in MD4.
Raskin won in MD8.
johnk says
don’t know that I’ll blame Sanders here, but he’s been getting some heat for not supporting down ballot supporter who would work toward the goals of the “Revolution”. You can’t do it yourself, you need votes on Capitol Hill.
doubleman says
Sanders should have helped Fetterman. It probably wouldn’t have been enough, but Fetterman is exactly the kind of candidate Sanders should want to support. Sestak is an oddball and independent but not always in the best way, and McGinty was the full-on establishment choice.
Similarly, Sanders should have worked for Donna Edwards in MD. That support, plus some money, may have made a difference in that closer race. I don’t know if it was ego or something else (Edwards endorsed Clinton), but her challenge to a very establishment player in Van Hollen was something Sanders should have got behind.
dunwichdem says
I was surprised by Fetterman’s good showing, I thought he’d get half of what he did. I do think Sanders should have given him some support, especially because he clearly wanted it. I’m not sure Sanders helping Edwards would have worked well for either side, since she had endorsed Clinton. It would probably have been uncomfortable for both sides.
SomervilleTom says
The central core of the Sanders campaign is the “grassroots revolution” he proposes to lead. That revolution, like every revolution, can only succeed if it is larger than one person. A successful revolution must be based on a reasonably solid intellectual foundation — and must welcome those who share and express that foundation.
Uncomfortable or not, if Ms. Edwards would have advanced the populist agenda more than her competitor, then the Sanders campaign should have worked for her — if the Sanders campaign is serious about its agenda.
Christopher says
…also has 54 unbound delegates who could become very popular if the 1237 threshold isn’t hit.
jconway says
I read that Trump won PA decisively that they wouldn’t be an issue anymore, and he clinches this thing once Indiana goes his way which it probably will. Clinton has already clinched, no? Even if Sanders won every other contest, we are at that point?
Christopher says
…but my understanding is that PA also elects actual named delegates on the ballot themselves who are completely free to vote for whomever even on the first ballot. I believe winning PA decisively gets him the at-large statewide delegates, but not the CD ones. Clinton has not officially clinched in the sense that she does not yet have 2383 delegates definitely for her, but the AP seems to think he can’t win even if he wins every remaining contest.
Christopher says
It has been reported that 39 of the 54 have publicly said they plan to vote for Trump on the first ballot.