Hillary won more votes for President

Free

what dreams said:

mrussel1 said:

Free said:

Let's face it Hillary supporters.

The sheer number of Sanders supporters completely outweighs Hillary supporters.

Have a nice day.

Bye!

Reminds me of a sarcastic joke a colleague shared with me today, when discussing a different group of believers who won't give up at work, in spite of all contrary evidence: "Always believe in the power of delusional thinking."

Because they are supposed to militantly and Orwellianly "fall in line", you say? Good luck with that!

what dreams

Free said:

what dreams said:

mrussel1 said:

Free said:

Let's face it Hillary supporters.

The sheer number of Sanders supporters completely outweighs Hillary supporters.

Have a nice day.

Bye!

Reminds me of a sarcastic joke a colleague shared with me today, when discussing a different group of believers who won't give up at work, in spite of all contrary evidence: "Always believe in the power of delusional thinking."

Because they are supposed to militantly and Orwellianly "fall in line", you say? Good luck with that!

Your use of hyperbole is stunningly predictable.

You can fall in whatever line you would like. George Orwell be damned, people still have free will when they walk into their private voting booths in America. I've already said I don't care much about what happens to the minor fringe element who voted for Bernie as a Democrat in the primaries and caucuses.

You asked me at one point why I kept posting about Hillary in the Sanders thread. That was a good question . . . The answer is because you spend a lot of time bringing up Hillary in the Sanders thread. All the conspiracy theories and negative, cry-baby "the system is out to get us." Over and over. And now here you are in the Hillary thread, like a pesky red mosquito after the same blood.

mrussel1

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Kat said:

what dreams said:

Kat said:

I really enjoyed this article because it talks about a side of Hillary that people don't get to see enough.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/hillary-clinton-candidacy.html

Thank you for sharing. Reading this brings me back to my young college days when Hillary first arrived on the national scene as First Lady. She was a tremendous role model for the kind of woman I wanted to be when I grew up. Twenty-five years later, I still connect to her struggles in multiple ways. I hope that when I'm 68, I'm still fighting the good fight the way she does.

She's one tough lady and she's going to need all of that toughness to get things done. Time will tell but even so, breaking that never-a-woman-president barrier, I believe, will go far in improving things for all women...which will improve things for families too and that includes men, obviously. She's very qualified and although no president has ever been perfect, I think she'll do very well.

We've seen how she feels about younger women. You must've forgotten that.

Is the only reason you like Hillary because she's a woman?
Because that's a sad reason. I can think of two good women much better than Hillary that would make a better president than she would. Jill Stein and Elizabeth Warren.

Will you still support Warren when she starts campaigning for Clinton?

A double female ticket will be a tough thing to believe at this point. And not one that's a sure bet against Trump, let alone a Hillary race against Trump. They're both dismal as it is, the least liked in history.

I said "for"...not with. I'm not suggesting Warren will be picked for VP but she will fall in line and be a huge supporter of Clinton....just like Sanders. You'll just have to start accepting that.

If you think I, along w/ millions of supporters of Sanders, are going to "get in line", you've got another thing coming baby.

That doesn't support the polling. I think I saw like 67% of Sanders supporters say they will support Clinton at this point. Once he concedes and tells his supporters to get behind Clinton the smart ones will do that and push that 67% to around 90% or so. My opinion but I think that's reasonable.

Polling. That's reliable!!

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Kat said:

what dreams said:

Kat said:

I really enjoyed this article because it talks about a side of Hillary that people don't get to see enough.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/hillary-clinton-candidacy.html

Thank you for sharing. Reading this brings me back to my young college days when Hillary first arrived on the national scene as First Lady. She was a tremendous role model for the kind of woman I wanted to be when I grew up. Twenty-five years later, I still connect to her struggles in multiple ways. I hope that when I'm 68, I'm still fighting the good fight the way she does.

She's one tough lady and she's going to need all of that toughness to get things done. Time will tell but even so, breaking that never-a-woman-president barrier, I believe, will go far in improving things for all women...which will improve things for families too and that includes men, obviously. She's very qualified and although no president has ever been perfect, I think she'll do very well.

We've seen how she feels about younger women. You must've forgotten that.

Is the only reason you like Hillary because she's a woman?
Because that's a sad reason. I can think of two good women much better than Hillary that would make a better president than she would. Jill Stein and Elizabeth Warren.

Will you still support Warren when she starts campaigning for Clinton?

A double female ticket will be a tough thing to believe at this point. And not one that's a sure bet against Trump, let alone a Hillary race against Trump. They're both dismal as it is, the least liked in history.

I said "for"...not with. I'm not suggesting Warren will be picked for VP but she will fall in line and be a huge supporter of Clinton....just like Sanders. You'll just have to start accepting that.

If you think I, along w/ millions of supporters of Sanders, are going to "get in line", you've got another thing coming baby.

That doesn't support the polling. I think I saw like 67% of Sanders supporters say they will support Clinton at this point. Once he concedes and tells his supporters to get behind Clinton the smart ones will do that and push that 67% to around 90% or so. My opinion but I think that's reasonable.

There's no reason to think this won't play out, particularly if Sanders backs her, which he said he would. Obama is going to campaign very hard and make the distinction very clear. Warren will pile on, as will Biden.

And once the Clinton team starts unleashing attack ads, it's going to hurt Trump. And we know that his skin is thin. Look at the way he reacted at his presser yesterday. He was so mad that he was getting bad press, he could barely find his words.

rgambs

Free said:

Let's face it Hillary supporters.

The sheer number of Sanders supporters completely outweighs Hillary supporters.

Have a nice day.

Seriously dude, you are making me wish I wasn't a Bernie supporter.
Sanders is THE MAN but his support is getting closer and closer to an equal force of immaturity to that of Trump's supporters.

The votes are in, and Sanders is losing. If you can't accept loss without screaming "you cheated" you shouldn't be playing at the adult's table.
Your contention here is that 3 million false votes were logged for Clinton? No, even worse, since Sanders is completely outweighing Clinton it must be more like 5 or 6 million cases of voter fraud...
That is an absolutely ridiculous line of thinking.


It is clear that Sanders has more supporters that are ardent, dedicated, and committed to him than Clinton, but even though the vast majority of voters don't go to rallies, they go to the polls and they are (sadly) picking Clinton.

Free

Free said:

This video doesn't show how Clinton's campaign along with the mainstream media are cheating to win. Nooooooo........

https://m.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4kwxsy/msnbc_admits_well_suppress_voting_to_help_clinton/

Just going to put this right here, since this is the Hillary thread.

MSNBC network will be ready to project at 5 pm Pacific Time that Hillary is the presumptive nominee. Which means that Californian voters will be uncounted in their final 3 hours of voting.

But you people can go back to your regular programing of pretending you didn't seeing this. Because it is unpleasant and you'd rather talk about pretty things or just slamming the non-conformist.

Gambs, your post is One of the better ones, but you don't address these issues either. You participate in slamming too.

This is blatant cheating folks. And it involves all of us. Pretend you don't see it, divert your attention, go get bombed. But this is our country at work and it fails us all. Especially, when we start talking about "falling in line".

Free

https://m.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4kwxsy/msnbc_admits_well_suppress_voting_to_help_clinton/

Free

https://m.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4kwxsy/msnbc_admits_well_suppress_voting_to_help_clinton/

mrussel1

Free said:

Free said:

This video doesn't show how Clinton's campaign along with the mainstream media are cheating to win. Nooooooo........

https://m.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4kwxsy/msnbc_admits_well_suppress_voting_to_help_clinton/

Just going to put this right here, since this is the Hillary thread.

MSNBC network will be ready to project at 5 pm Pacific Time that Hillary is the presumptive nominee. Which means that Californian voters will be uncounted in their final 3 hours of voting.

But you people can go back to your regular programing of pretending you didn't seeing this. Because it is unpleasant and you'd rather talk about pretty things or just slamming the non-conformist.

Gambs, your post is One of the better ones, but you don't address these issues either. You participate in slamming too.

This is blatant cheating folks. And it involves all of us. Pretend you don't see it, divert your attention, go get bombed. But this is our country at work and it fails us all. Especially, when we start talking about "falling in line".

Wait a minute... is the argument here that because Hillary will likely be declared the winner of NJ at 8PM, that will give her enough delegates plus SD's to secure the nomination, that this is somehow cheating the CA voters?

hedonist

Free said:

Free said:

This video doesn't show how Clinton's campaign along with the mainstream media are cheating to win. Nooooooo........

https://m.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4kwxsy/msnbc_admits_well_suppress_voting_to_help_clinton/

Just going to put this right here, since this is the Hillary thread.

MSNBC network will be ready to project at 5 pm Pacific Time that Hillary is the presumptive nominee. Which means that Californian voters will be uncounted in their final 3 hours of voting.

But you people can go back to your regular programing of pretending you didn't seeing this. Because it is unpleasant and you'd rather talk about pretty things or just slamming the non-conformist.

Gambs, your post is One of the better ones, but you don't address these issues either. You participate in slamming too.

This is blatant cheating folks. And it involves all of us. Pretend you don't see it, divert your attention, go get bombed. But this is our country at work and it fails us all. Especially, when we start talking about "falling in line".

Who are you to take others to task for "slamming"?

The way you treat others in what I'd hoped would be civil debates makes you lose much credibility...despite your many links.

mrussel1

Free said:

Free said:

This video doesn't show how Clinton's campaign along with the mainstream media are cheating to win. Nooooooo........

https://m.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4kwxsy/msnbc_admits_well_suppress_voting_to_help_clinton/

Just going to put this right here, since this is the Hillary thread.

MSNBC network will be ready to project at 5 pm Pacific Time that Hillary is the presumptive nominee. Which means that Californian voters will be uncounted in their final 3 hours of voting.

But you people can go back to your regular programing of pretending you didn't seeing this. Because it is unpleasant and you'd rather talk about pretty things or just slamming the non-conformist.

Gambs, your post is One of the better ones, but you don't address these issues either. You participate in slamming too.

This is blatant cheating folks. And it involves all of us. Pretend you don't see it, divert your attention, go get bombed. But this is our country at work and it fails us all. Especially, when we start talking about "falling in line".

Okay I'm going to indulge you a bit on this one because you are clearly amped up. I watched video:

1. Matthews uses the incorrect term and Weaver uses teh correct one. It's 'presumptive nominee'. This is not an inaccurate statement. Does it mean that it's impossible for SD's to switch? No, but she's still would be accurately considered presumptive.

2. Weaver states himself that it will depress voting on both sides. He doesn't say it will give Hillary an advantage. Yet the title on Reddit clearly draws that conclusion. Strange, no? I guess the poster knows something that dumb ass Jeff Weaver doesn't.

3. Why aren't you over on the Trump thread bitching about his being called presumptive for the last several weeks. Technically if he doesn't get through the first vote with a majority, no one is required to vote for him.

4. You don't understand what the word 'cheating' means. Explain to me how this is cheating. Newsflash: It doesn't matter if he wins CA or not. The SD's are not switching to him unless she is indicted next week. Even then, they might go for Biden instead considering Sanders and his supporters attack everyone that doesn't agree with him. Going after Barney Frank was likely the last straw for the party officials.

Gern Blansten

mrussel1 said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Kat said:

what dreams said:

Kat said:

I really enjoyed this article because it talks about a side of Hillary that people don't get to see enough.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/hillary-clinton-candidacy.html

Thank you for sharing. Reading this brings me back to my young college days when Hillary first arrived on the national scene as First Lady. She was a tremendous role model for the kind of woman I wanted to be when I grew up. Twenty-five years later, I still connect to her struggles in multiple ways. I hope that when I'm 68, I'm still fighting the good fight the way she does.

She's one tough lady and she's going to need all of that toughness to get things done. Time will tell but even so, breaking that never-a-woman-president barrier, I believe, will go far in improving things for all women...which will improve things for families too and that includes men, obviously. She's very qualified and although no president has ever been perfect, I think she'll do very well.

We've seen how she feels about younger women. You must've forgotten that.

Is the only reason you like Hillary because she's a woman?
Because that's a sad reason. I can think of two good women much better than Hillary that would make a better president than she would. Jill Stein and Elizabeth Warren.

Will you still support Warren when she starts campaigning for Clinton?

A double female ticket will be a tough thing to believe at this point. And not one that's a sure bet against Trump, let alone a Hillary race against Trump. They're both dismal as it is, the least liked in history.

I said "for"...not with. I'm not suggesting Warren will be picked for VP but she will fall in line and be a huge supporter of Clinton....just like Sanders. You'll just have to start accepting that.

If you think I, along w/ millions of supporters of Sanders, are going to "get in line", you've got another thing coming baby.

That doesn't support the polling. I think I saw like 67% of Sanders supporters say they will support Clinton at this point. Once he concedes and tells his supporters to get behind Clinton the smart ones will do that and push that 67% to around 90% or so. My opinion but I think that's reasonable.

Polling. That's reliable!!

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Gern Blansten said:

Free said:

Kat said:

what dreams said:

Kat said:

I really enjoyed this article because it talks about a side of Hillary that people don't get to see enough.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/hillary-clinton-candidacy.html

Thank you for sharing. Reading this brings me back to my young college days when Hillary first arrived on the national scene as First Lady. She was a tremendous role model for the kind of woman I wanted to be when I grew up. Twenty-five years later, I still connect to her struggles in multiple ways. I hope that when I'm 68, I'm still fighting the good fight the way she does.

She's one tough lady and she's going to need all of that toughness to get things done. Time will tell but even so, breaking that never-a-woman-president barrier, I believe, will go far in improving things for all women...which will improve things for families too and that includes men, obviously. She's very qualified and although no president has ever been perfect, I think she'll do very well.

We've seen how she feels about younger women. You must've forgotten that.

Is the only reason you like Hillary because she's a woman?
Because that's a sad reason. I can think of two good women much better than Hillary that would make a better president than she would. Jill Stein and Elizabeth Warren.

Will you still support Warren when she starts campaigning for Clinton?

A double female ticket will be a tough thing to believe at this point. And not one that's a sure bet against Trump, let alone a Hillary race against Trump. They're both dismal as it is, the least liked in history.

I said "for"...not with. I'm not suggesting Warren will be picked for VP but she will fall in line and be a huge supporter of Clinton....just like Sanders. You'll just have to start accepting that.

If you think I, along w/ millions of supporters of Sanders, are going to "get in line", you've got another thing coming baby.

That doesn't support the polling. I think I saw like 67% of Sanders supporters say they will support Clinton at this point. Once he concedes and tells his supporters to get behind Clinton the smart ones will do that and push that 67% to around 90% or so. My opinion but I think that's reasonable.

There's no reason to think this won't play out, particularly if Sanders backs her, which he said he would. Obama is going to campaign very hard and make the distinction very clear. Warren will pile on, as will Biden.

And once the Clinton team starts unleashing attack ads, it's going to hurt Trump. And we know that his skin is thin. Look at the way he reacted at his presser yesterday. He was so mad that he was getting bad press, he could barely find his words.

Yeah I didn't even think of Biden. I just hope she doesn't screw up the VP pick.

The Trump University stuff has given Clinton TONS of ammo. Trump had to start defending himself yesterday...I'm guessing that will be their strategy so that he is always apologizing or defending himself.

benjs

rgambs said:

Free said:

Let's face it Hillary supporters.

The sheer number of Sanders supporters completely outweighs Hillary supporters.

Have a nice day.

Seriously dude, you are making me wish I wasn't a Bernie supporter.
Sanders is THE MAN but his support is getting closer and closer to an equal force of immaturity to that of Trump's supporters.

The votes are in, and Sanders is losing. If you can't accept loss without screaming "you cheated" you shouldn't be playing at the adult's table.
Your contention here is that 3 million false votes were logged for Clinton? No, even worse, since Sanders is completely outweighing Clinton it must be more like 5 or 6 million cases of voter fraud...
That is an absolutely ridiculous line of thinking.


It is clear that Sanders has more supporters that are ardent, dedicated, and committed to him than Clinton, but even though the vast majority of voters don't go to rallies, they go to the polls and they are (sadly) picking Clinton.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would love to see Sanders as POTUS, and will continue to hope this is the case until he is 100% out of the race. That doesn't mean I'll ignore basic mathematics, or get offended when people show valid statistics suggesting he's (very clearly) the underdog in becoming the Democratic party's nominee.

Gern Blansten

Moved

Free

benjs said:

rgambs said:

Free said:

Let's face it Hillary supporters.

The sheer number of Sanders supporters completely outweighs Hillary supporters.

Have a nice day.

Seriously dude, you are making me wish I wasn't a Bernie supporter.
Sanders is THE MAN but his support is getting closer and closer to an equal force of immaturity to that of Trump's supporters.

The votes are in, and Sanders is losing. If you can't accept loss without screaming "you cheated" you shouldn't be playing at the adult's table.
Your contention here is that 3 million false votes were logged for Clinton? No, even worse, since Sanders is completely outweighing Clinton it must be more like 5 or 6 million cases of voter fraud...
That is an absolutely ridiculous line of thinking.


It is clear that Sanders has more supporters that are ardent, dedicated, and committed to him than Clinton, but even though the vast majority of voters don't go to rallies, they go to the polls and they are (sadly) picking Clinton.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would love to see Sanders as POTUS, and will continue to hope this is the case until he is 100% out of the race. That doesn't mean I'll ignore basic mathematics, or get offended when people show valid statistics suggesting he's (very clearly) the underdog in becoming the Democratic party's nominee.

You're both missing the point though. This isn't about Sanders winning anymore, we all know it's a slim chance.

The point that no one seems to want to talk about is how this election IS rigged. Don't gloss over that fact, Benjs and gambs. This isn't about falling into line behind another candidate, this is about the corruption of the election process.

I'll say it again, MSNBC is planning to call the CA race @ 5pm Pacific time, well before polls close. And most people go vote after work.

Address THAT point, which affects all Americans regardless of party, not individuals!

This is not some silly made up notion, the media has admitted it!

mrussel1

Free said:

benjs said:

rgambs said:

Free said:

Let's face it Hillary supporters.

The sheer number of Sanders supporters completely outweighs Hillary supporters.

Have a nice day.

Seriously dude, you are making me wish I wasn't a Bernie supporter.
Sanders is THE MAN but his support is getting closer and closer to an equal force of immaturity to that of Trump's supporters.

The votes are in, and Sanders is losing. If you can't accept loss without screaming "you cheated" you shouldn't be playing at the adult's table.
Your contention here is that 3 million false votes were logged for Clinton? No, even worse, since Sanders is completely outweighing Clinton it must be more like 5 or 6 million cases of voter fraud...
That is an absolutely ridiculous line of thinking.


It is clear that Sanders has more supporters that are ardent, dedicated, and committed to him than Clinton, but even though the vast majority of voters don't go to rallies, they go to the polls and they are (sadly) picking Clinton.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would love to see Sanders as POTUS, and will continue to hope this is the case until he is 100% out of the race. That doesn't mean I'll ignore basic mathematics, or get offended when people show valid statistics suggesting he's (very clearly) the underdog in becoming the Democratic party's nominee.

You're both missing the point though. This isn't about Sanders winning anymore, we all know it's a slim chance.

The point that no one seems to want to talk about is how this election IS rigged. Don't gloss over that fact, Benjs and gambs. This isn't about falling into line behind another candidate, this is about the corruption of the election process.

I'll say it again, MSNBC is planning to call the CA race @ 5pm Pacific time, well before polls close. And most people go vote after work.

Address THAT point, which affects all Americans regardless of party, not individuals!

This is not some silly made up notion, the media has admitted it!

You aren't even reading our own sources. MSNBC and others will call Hillary the presumptive nominee AFTER she wins NJ. NJ closes at 5PM PST. Through exit polling, she will have enough delegates at that point. Those delegates and the SDs that have committed will put her over the top. They are not calling California. Jesus Christ. Pay attention.

Free

mrussel1 said:

Free said:

benjs said:

rgambs said:

Free said:

Let's face it Hillary supporters.

The sheer number of Sanders supporters completely outweighs Hillary supporters.

Have a nice day.

Seriously dude, you are making me wish I wasn't a Bernie supporter.
Sanders is THE MAN but his support is getting closer and closer to an equal force of immaturity to that of Trump's supporters.

The votes are in, and Sanders is losing. If you can't accept loss without screaming "you cheated" you shouldn't be playing at the adult's table.
Your contention here is that 3 million false votes were logged for Clinton? No, even worse, since Sanders is completely outweighing Clinton it must be more like 5 or 6 million cases of voter fraud...
That is an absolutely ridiculous line of thinking.


It is clear that Sanders has more supporters that are ardent, dedicated, and committed to him than Clinton, but even though the vast majority of voters don't go to rallies, they go to the polls and they are (sadly) picking Clinton.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would love to see Sanders as POTUS, and will continue to hope this is the case until he is 100% out of the race. That doesn't mean I'll ignore basic mathematics, or get offended when people show valid statistics suggesting he's (very clearly) the underdog in becoming the Democratic party's nominee.

You're both missing the point though. This isn't about Sanders winning anymore, we all know it's a slim chance.

The point that no one seems to want to talk about is how this election IS rigged. Don't gloss over that fact, Benjs and gambs. This isn't about falling into line behind another candidate, this is about the corruption of the election process.

I'll say it again, MSNBC is planning to call the CA race @ 5pm Pacific time, well before polls close. And most people go vote after work.

Address THAT point, which affects all Americans regardless of party, not individuals!

This is not some silly made up notion, the media has admitted it!

You aren't even reading our own sources. MSNBC and others will call Hillary the presumptive nominee AFTER she wins NJ. NJ closes at 5PM PST. Through exit polling, she will have enough delegates at that point. Those delegates and the SDs that have committed will put her over the top. They are not calling California. Jesus Christ. Pay attention.

YOU pay attention. The election process is to call winners after ALL votes are counted. Sanders and Clinton are tied for CA. There is no maneuvering around election processes without it being CHEATING. Superdelegates VOTE in JULY. Jesus Christ. Pay Attention.

polaris_x

no one can really argue that the electoral process in the US is anything but undemocratic ...it's totally rigged ... but you guys haven't even moved to the metric system yet so clearly no one cares!

mrussel1

Free said:

mrussel1 said:

Free said:

benjs said:

rgambs said:

Free said:

Let's face it Hillary supporters.

The sheer number of Sanders supporters completely outweighs Hillary supporters.

Have a nice day.

Seriously dude, you are making me wish I wasn't a Bernie supporter.
Sanders is THE MAN but his support is getting closer and closer to an equal force of immaturity to that of Trump's supporters.

The votes are in, and Sanders is losing. If you can't accept loss without screaming "you cheated" you shouldn't be playing at the adult's table.
Your contention here is that 3 million false votes were logged for Clinton? No, even worse, since Sanders is completely outweighing Clinton it must be more like 5 or 6 million cases of voter fraud...
That is an absolutely ridiculous line of thinking.


It is clear that Sanders has more supporters that are ardent, dedicated, and committed to him than Clinton, but even though the vast majority of voters don't go to rallies, they go to the polls and they are (sadly) picking Clinton.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I would love to see Sanders as POTUS, and will continue to hope this is the case until he is 100% out of the race. That doesn't mean I'll ignore basic mathematics, or get offended when people show valid statistics suggesting he's (very clearly) the underdog in becoming the Democratic party's nominee.

You're both missing the point though. This isn't about Sanders winning anymore, we all know it's a slim chance.

The point that no one seems to want to talk about is how this election IS rigged. Don't gloss over that fact, Benjs and gambs. This isn't about falling into line behind another candidate, this is about the corruption of the election process.

I'll say it again, MSNBC is planning to call the CA race @ 5pm Pacific time, well before polls close. And most people go vote after work.

Address THAT point, which affects all Americans regardless of party, not individuals!

This is not some silly made up notion, the media has admitted it!

You aren't even reading our own sources. MSNBC and others will call Hillary the presumptive nominee AFTER she wins NJ. NJ closes at 5PM PST. Through exit polling, she will have enough delegates at that point. Those delegates and the SDs that have committed will put her over the top. They are not calling California. Jesus Christ. Pay attention.

YOU pay attention. The election process is to call winners after ALL votes are counted. Sanders and Clinton are tied for CA. There is no maneuvering around election processes without it being CHEATING. Superdelegates VOTE in JULY. Jesus Christ. Pay Attention.

This... "MSNBC is planning to call the CA race @ 5pm Pacific time, well before polls close." is what you said and is not what the video said or what Chris Matthews said. They are not calling CA before the polls close. That has not happened in several years. There is nothing illegal about it, but the media self imposed the policy. Pay attention to your own sources.

Free

Watch carefully.

https://m.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4kwxsy/msnbc_admits_well_suppress_voting_to_help_clinton/

Free

polaris_x said:

no one can really argue that the electoral process in the US is anything but undemocratic ...it's totally rigged ... but you guys haven't even moved to the metric system yet so clearly no one cares!

Now, at least this post is at least on the right track!