Tuesday, May 10, 2016

CLINTON WINS NEBRASKA PRIMARY! (There's Only One Problem...)


Spread the news! Hillary Clinton has emerged victorious in the Nebraska Democratic primary!
There are probably a couple of thoughts running through your head right now.

1) Hey...that's AWESOME!

2) Wait...there's a Democratic primary in Nebraska?!

That's right. But here's the problem: the votes don't officially "count" because the delegates were already awarded two months ago in the Nebraska caucuses.
Which makes total sense, right?

But at least the caucuses had a larger turnout, which better reflects the...oh wait...
Nebraska Democrats also turned out today to vote in downballot races, and they should be applauded for doing so. However, imagine how much higher the turnout might have been today if the marquee race actually counted! But even though it doesn't get her any delegates, this primary victory for Clinton does serve to further demonstrate that caucuses are definitely not the best method for measuring the will of the electorate and should be retired by 2020 or 2024.

And hey, a symbolic win is still a win as far as I'm concerned...especially because it was decided by tens of thousands of good citizens who took the time and effort to do their civic duty.

Thank you, Democrats of Nebraska! Your votes count to me.

14 comments:

  1. works for me, and the 1/3 of sanders primary votes that will go to donald in the general, but only 10% of the Hillary votes gives her a 'win' of a kind in West Virginia, not one she would claim but if it were Sanders he for sure would fundraise on being cheated again of what should by right of natural superiority be his. One reporter said he was gleeful that he'd gotten Hillary to spend money on the primary again, he wants the attention. So I am very glad that his caucus win in Nebraska was shown to be worth nothing but the air it took up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am confused... Why do they have a primary if it doesn't count since they already had a caucus ? ... Makes no sense and sounds like a waste of money too...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not saying this is the reason but we had down-ballot races and the ballots were being printed anyway. I went to the caucus in March. It was almost a Bernie rally. At the precinct I was at, the Clinton supporters were outnumbered 7 to 1. Anonymous votes seem just a little fairer.

      Delete
    2. Darla Cook, I think we are all confused.

      Delete
    3. We have the same thing in Washington state. Republicans forced the primary even after Bernie won the caucuses 73% to 27% for Hillary. Since the primary does not count there is no need for voting in it so it cannot be used to judge how people would vote if it did count. Same with Nebraska. There is no way to tell how people would have voted in a real primary where the outcome mattered.

      Delete
  3. Caucuses seem rife with corruption
    Why and who started caucuses? Time to end all state caucuses, in fact states running of national elections needs to end, voter suppression tells us why, Republicans are afraid of their citizens..with good reason.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Caucuses need to go, for sure. But yeah, that's only the beginning of needed election reforms to insure everyone's voice is heard.

      Delete
  4. You idiots. So you take a *completely closed primary* (not even a semi-closed where unaffiliated voters can participate) and compare it to a caucus where independents are allowed to participate? No duh you got those results. Sheesh, I can't believe the twisted things I see from the media in this election. Plus, you are looking at a primary that doesn't count -- literally -- it doesn't affect anything. Why on earth would people participate? You can see that in the numbers. Do you really think there are only 78,510 democrats in Nebraska compared with the 197,428 republicans? I don't think so. Yes, it's a red state, but it's not 3 times over a red state, and you can see that from the 2012 presidential election.

    And I'll reiterate: caucuses allow independents to participate, and Nebraska has a *CLOSED* primary.

    Unbelievable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All primaries should be closed....caucuses need to go....Independents that want to vote in either Dem or Repub primary need to register as such beforehand...All should be automatically registered at 18.... Election Day should be a holiday during Presidential years for both the primary and the general...

      Delete
    2. This was a perfect example of why caucuses need to go...one candidate wins caucus 58-42 but in primary the other one wins by the same margin...caucuses take too much time, people are intimidated and it isn't hard to cheat.. A person should vote by themself to their own conscious alone in a voting booth.....

      Delete
    3. ForgottenGold, be polite or all future comments will be deleted.

      It's really amazing how Democratic primaries open to actual DEMOCRATS only have been around for decades without a problem...until those damn Democrats kept choosing someone other than the non-Democrat, then its an OUTRAGE!

      A MUCH smaller number of participants that include Dems, Indys, Reps, and whoever else wants to meddle should choose the Democratic nominee...that's your pro-open caucus argument. Because Bernie.

      Delete
    4. Curious Forgotten Gold, why didn't Bernie spend even 5 minutes during those HUUUGE rallies, schooling his political neophyte supporters that they would have to become Democrats to vote for him?

      Delete
    5. Nebraska party primaries are not open to independents. I'm an independent in Omaha. We had about 22% voter turnout for primary.

      Delete
  5. Well, when Bernie asks for superdelegates just point to Nebraska. If this were an outcome for the Sanders campaign they'd be screaming the system is rigged.

    ReplyDelete