MSNBC was showing 2 hour lines to vote at 8pm central (you know, when the damn polls close).
doublemansays
Pardon my language, but it’s the truth. I doubt too many here disagree. They are the worst and the only reason to support them is if you want to keep Dem-leaning turnout down. They are also another example of how the Democratic party is failing in state races.
mike_cotesays
MSNBC is projecting Cruz winning Wisconsin!
kbuschsays
mike_coote.
jconwaysays
John King said he needed a 55:40 win to get delegates and that’s what’s happening. And fuck Ted Cruz, he’s more obnoxious than Trump.
johnksays
and that’s what happened, a decisive victory. It looks like a +11 delegate win for Sanders, so a fair amount.
He’s going to win Wyoming big, then try like hell to convince voters in the Atlantic states where Clinton is dominant that he has momentum. He doesn’t, we talked about this weeks ago knowing the result of this stretch on states and the math factored this in, but that’s what he’s going to do.
hoyapaulsays
I do think Sanders’s win was more “real” in the sense that voters were actually voting FOR him, while many Republicans voters went for Cruz simply to stop Trump. But either way, it’s hard to ignore what looks to be double-digit wins for both.
How will this change the race? On the Democratic side, only if the Cheesehead results (and the next two weeks) move the needle significantly in New York. It won’t hurt picking up another big win in Wyoming just before NY as well. But the delegate math is as daunting as always for Sanders. On the Republican side, I think the results are particularly important. Trump’s chances of winning a majority of delegates is now quite a bit lower, even if he romps in NY. Cruz is doing a great job as the GOP’s tool to ensure a contested convention (where neither Trump nor Cruz would be likely to get the nomination).
Christophersays
…but I’ve seen it called a blowout whereas I usually reserve the word for at least a 60-40 spread.
MSNBC was showing 2 hour lines to vote at 8pm central (you know, when the damn polls close).
Pardon my language, but it’s the truth. I doubt too many here disagree. They are the worst and the only reason to support them is if you want to keep Dem-leaning turnout down. They are also another example of how the Democratic party is failing in state races.
mike_coote.
John King said he needed a 55:40 win to get delegates and that’s what’s happening. And fuck Ted Cruz, he’s more obnoxious than Trump.
and that’s what happened, a decisive victory. It looks like a +11 delegate win for Sanders, so a fair amount.
He’s going to win Wyoming big, then try like hell to convince voters in the Atlantic states where Clinton is dominant that he has momentum. He doesn’t, we talked about this weeks ago knowing the result of this stretch on states and the math factored this in, but that’s what he’s going to do.
I do think Sanders’s win was more “real” in the sense that voters were actually voting FOR him, while many Republicans voters went for Cruz simply to stop Trump. But either way, it’s hard to ignore what looks to be double-digit wins for both.
How will this change the race? On the Democratic side, only if the Cheesehead results (and the next two weeks) move the needle significantly in New York. It won’t hurt picking up another big win in Wyoming just before NY as well. But the delegate math is as daunting as always for Sanders. On the Republican side, I think the results are particularly important. Trump’s chances of winning a majority of delegates is now quite a bit lower, even if he romps in NY. Cruz is doing a great job as the GOP’s tool to ensure a contested convention (where neither Trump nor Cruz would be likely to get the nomination).
…but I’ve seen it called a blowout whereas I usually reserve the word for at least a 60-40 spread.