4:06pm 88% counted now, and Biden will finish second ahead of Buttigieg. I’ve done an article for The Conversation that emphasises the differences between the county delegate count (huge win for Sanders) and the initial popular vote (far less impressive for Sanders).
9:50am Monday Still only 60% reporting. If Nevada was close like Iowa, there’d be another stink about the slow results.
4:30pm 43% now reporting, and Sanders has 47% of county delegates, but only 34.5% of the initial alignment vote. He has 40.3% of the vote after realignment.
4:08pm CNN has more up-to-date figures on initial and final votes. Using CNN’s results, I calculate that Sanders has 35% of the initial vote and 40.5% of the vote after realignment with 34% in. Those figures are not as impressive for Sanders as his share of county delegates (47%).
Once again, we’ve had a dreadfully slow caucus count. Hopefully there’ll be more clarity tomorrow.
2:10pm And it’s suddenly jumped to 22.5% reporting, with Sanders at 34% on first alignment, 40% on final alignment and 47% of county delegates.
2:07pm With 11% reporting, the Sanders margin is smaller on the first alignment votes. Sanders has 34% on this measure, Biden 19%, Buttigieg 16% and Warren 12%. On popular votes after realignment, Sanders has 40%, Biden 23%, Buttigieg 17% and Warren 10%. On county delegates, 47% Sanders, 24% Biden and 14% Buttigieg.
Sanders is being assisted in the final alignment votes by being the only candidate who exceeds the 15% threshold in the vast majority of precincts.
12:20pm With 4% reporting, the Associated Press has CALLED Nevada for Bernie Sanders.
11:18am Once again (as in New Hampshire), the AP count, used by the NY Times, is well behind the count used by the TV networks including CNN. With 10% reporting, the CNN results give Sanders a large lead in initial votes, but there are no percentages.
11:05am As with Iowa, the counting in Nevada is SLOOOOW!! Just 3.4% of precincts have reported their initial alignment.
9:52am With less than 3% reporting, Sanders has 44% of the initial vote, 54% of the final vote and 55% of county delegates. The initial vote is slightly ahead of the other two measures in precincts reporting. Still a long way to go, but it’s looking like a big win for Sanders.
8:41am With 1% reporting, Sanders has 48% of the initial alignment, 53% of the vote after candidate realignment, and 52% of the county delegates. Biden is a distant second with 18%, 23% and 26% on these three measures respectively.
7:33am The caucuses actually began 33 minutes ago. First results are expected by 8:30am. Entrance polls give Sanders about 35%, with the next highest at 15%.
Guest post by Adrian Beaumont, who joins us from time to time to provide commentary on elections internationally. Adrian is an honorary associate at the University of Melbourne. His work on electoral matters for The Conversation can be found here, and his own website is here.
The Nevada Democratic caucuses begin at 10am local time Saturday (5am Sunday AEDT). I am not sure when to expect results; they could come in the early morning, but may not come on Sunday at all, given the Iowa fiasco. Caucuses are managed by the party, not the state’s electoral authorities. It should be a relief that there are very few caucuses after Nevada.
Democratic delegates are allocated proportionally to all candidates who clear a 15% threshold, both within a state and Congressional District. In the RealClearPolitics Nevada poll average, Bernie Sanders has 29.0%, Joe Biden 16.0%, Pete Buttigieg 14.0%, Elizabeth Warren 14.0% and Amy Klobuchar 10.5%. Current national polls give Sanders 28.7%, Biden 17.3%, Mike Bloomberg 15.2%, Warren 12.7%, Buttigieg 10.0% and Klobuchar 6.7%.
With these polls, Sanders is the only candidate far enough above 15% to be assured of clearing that threshold virtually everywhere. If these national poll results are reflected on Super Tuesday March 3, when 14 states vote and 34% of all pledged delegates are awarded, Sanders’ share of delegates would far exceed his vote share.
There is one contest after Nevada before Super Tuesday: the South Carolina primary next Saturday. Biden needs a big win, but his lead over Sanders has plunged from 14 points in late January to just four points now.
Bloomberg had been gaining in the polls, at least before Wednesday’s widely criticised debate performance. However, in a direct match-up with Sanders, he got crushed by a 57-37 margin in an NBC/WSJ poll. While Bloomberg is winning the votes of those Democrats who believe only a billionaire can beat Donald Trump, most Democrats dislike giving the nomination to a billionaire.
If nobody comes near a majority of pledged delegates, there will be a contested Democratic convention in mid-July. Should this occur, it would be the first since 1952. If Bloomberg defeated Sanders at a contested convention, the Democratic party’s left would react badly to the perception of a billionaire stealing the nomination from their guy.
Assisted by the good US economy, Trump’s ratings are trending up. In the FiveThirtyEight aggregate, his net approval is -7.8% with polls of registered or likely voters. Trump still trails the leading Democrats in RealClearPolitics averages, with Sanders, Biden and Bloomberg leading by 4.5 points, and Buttigieg, Warren and Klobuchar leading by two points.
One of the most insidious things about social media and the internet is that is is impossible these days to simply celebrate anything without being dumped on from a height by hordes of doom-merchants and naysayers.
C@tmomma:
Hillary had a stroke in 2012. Did you write her off in 2016 because of that?
C@tmomma, Hillary had health issues, did you think it was comical for people to “boost” her ?
Do you think physical appearance/fitness is more important than policies ?
Jinx
j/k
Mr Newbie @ #102 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 4:02 pm
Excellent point.
“Plus those wanting Warren as VP – seriously you need to understand the USA. Anyone who believes Warren should be his VP are deluded.”
I wouldn’t go that far, because Elizabeth Warrens positions line up with Bernie Sanders more closely then other candidates. I think though Sanders probably needs to go with someone younger. The risk for Sanders choosing a centrist VP to the balance ticket is he may face a backlash on the Left that he is selling out and not being congruent to his beliefs. But that may not be that important in the grand scheme of things considering the name of the game is to win the election by appealing to the moderates and independents through a unity ticket but that may still not please some in his base.
Big A Adrian @ #61 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 10:40 am
Bernie will make Amazon start paying tax. The owner of the WaPo is not keen on that idea.
Confessions @ #69 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 11:05 am
It’s just as easy to ignore it when you’re a partisan ideologue.
“So a couple of weeks ago, a popular argument was that the Sanders vote capped out at ~30%, and that the remaining ~70% (distributed among other candidates) was an “anti-Sanders” vote which would eventually redistribute to other “moderates” or “centrists”, with none of it going to Sanders, as candidates dropped out.
Is that being borne out?”
The Bernie Bashers are remarkably quiet on their favourite ‘coalescence’ theory – remember that? Iowa and NH apparently proved that Bernie’s ceiling is 30% max, and therefore it was inevitable that the ‘sensible majority’ would “coalesce” around a single sensible moderate candidate.
It was obvious even then that this was delusional. Bernie at the time was surging, and he has been surging relentlessly ever since. Such that he has clearly breached the “Bernie bros” ceiling, and even beyond. Don’t just look at the headline polling figure, look also at the breakdown – look at how he is surging in all demographics – especially in demographics the Bernie bashers swore he would never breach.
There’s every reason to conclude that the democrat ‘sensible majority’ are indeed rallying and “coalescing” around a single candidate – just in the opposite way the Bernie bashers expected.
So its not surprising that the narrative is changing now. Its no longer ridiculing the idea (not to mention those who suggested it) that Bernie might win the dem. nomination, its now about what a gift he will be to Trump, who will surely anhialate him.
I can remember another US presidential candidate who was subject to the same arrogant dismissal – no way he will win the nomination, then changing to: no way he will win the presidency… can you guess who that was?
Mr Newbie @ #76 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 11:56 am
Ironically, their policies that the ALP supports or has introduced. Medicare for all being a prime example. They never ask how much Medicare for all Australians costs either.
The truth of the matter is Bernie would fit nicely into the centre/left faction of Labor. Biden, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Bloomberg and even both Clinton’s are more aligned with Turnbull style Liberals.
PN:
The ideal candidate would be a young(ish) woman of colour who’s fairly “safe” and can appeal to both progressives and centrists – preferably from the mid-west – but if none can be found, I’m increasingly starting to think Yang would actually be an excellent fit as Sanders running mate.
DP:
I’m pretty sure the main objection among Democrats to Sanders’ “Medicare for All” is not the “Medicare for All” part, but the “Private Insurance for Noone” part. Pretty much all the Democratic frontrunners (perhaps not Bloomberg) have some variety of “Medicare for All” platform, the difference being in the details and the attitude towards private insurance.
Private insurance is still very much a thing in Australia, and they are many, many services not covered by Medicare.
@Danama papers
Australia still has private health insurance and private healthcare for those who want to pay for it. Sanders specifcally wants to completly force everyone onto a public system with no option for anything else.
Given Bernie also wants free uni and open borders I’d say in Australian terms he’d be a Green and the moderate dems besides Bloomberg Labor right. Bloomberg would be a Turnbull lib.
Mr Newbie @ #102 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 4:02 pm
Get your talking points from Karl Rove, huh?
https://www.quora.com/Did-Hillary-Clinton-have-a-stroke-a-couple-of-years-ago
https://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/31/politics/hillary-clinton-hospitalized/
I produce evidence, you retail lies. Sad.
Just looking at Nevada polling alone as evidence that democrats are ‘coalescing’ now:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/nv/nevada_democratic_presidential_caucus-6866.html
Bernine went from 17.5% to 32.5 between Feb 12 and Feb 22. With over 40% of precints reporting in Nevada, he is upt to over 46%. Second place is daylight, followed by Biden on a tad over 20%.
In the polling period – Feb 12 – Feb 22, no other candidate got to more than half Bernie’s final poll standing.
Krull @ #113 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 4:30 pm
That’s why the Lunar Left love him. Though Sanders has as much chance of becoming President as The Greens do of becoming the government of Australia.
Danama Papers:
It’s quite eye-opening really to see how many Tory-lite Labor Right voters there are here.
C@tmomma:
Hillary had a cerebral venous sinus thrombosis in her cavernous sinus. i.e. a blood clot, on her brain, for which she was treated with anticoagulants. About 1% of strokes are of the venous thrombosis type.
Without “releasing her medical records” regarding this incident, we cannot know for sure that it did not result in a venous infarct – i.e. neurological damage. And, of course, current imaging does not necessarily pick up every small infarct.
That being said, you can have a ‘silent’ stroke, where there is no (obvious) neurological impairment, and the patient may not even know they’ve had a stroke.
But if you’re going to write Bernie off for having had a heart attack, why didn’t you write Hillary off for having a stroke?
Well, you learn something every day. Apparently Australia has Medicare for All already. No one has to pay anything for any Medicare service!
Oh wait…that’s just a figment of Bernie boosters vivid imaginations.
Mr Newbie @ #118 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 4:41 pm
Because she never had one. I’ve already provided the evidence at 4.33pm. Inform yourself.
It was a fabrication from the imagination of Karl Rove.
Asha Leu @ #112 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 1:27 pm
My point was that Bernie would fit nicely into the ALP. The others would be more likely to be in the Liberal Party.
C@tmomma:
I’ve had a cerebral venous thrombosis stroke; I don’t need to ‘inform’ myself on what it is.
The average life expectancy of a US male has risen by 9 years over the last fifty years. I think that should be considered in a discussion about a candidate’s age. Reagan was nudging 70 on inauguration (equates to 75 by today’s figures) and nudging 78 on leaving office (81.5 by today’s figures).
The people of Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada have chosen Bernie to be their champion. Poll Bludger centrists are dazed and confused by this result. A non-neoliberal candidate is thrashing a bunch of neoliberals. This is not supposed to happen in Centrist World.
For the first time in fifty years, voters have a viable, high profile, well-funded non-neoliberal candidate to vote for. And they are seizing that opportunity.
C@tmomma @ #119 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 1:41 pm
FFS. Australia does have Medicare for all. Has done since 1983. It’s paid for by the Medicare Levy (in theory at least). No-one, especially Bernie, has said a similar policy in America would be free to everyone.
While we’re on the subject, Medicare in Australia IS FREE(!) to people on very low incomes.
C@tmomma; You should know better than to call someone a liar like that. Even if they are wrong, its not a lie unless its deliberatly false, it requires intent to be a lie.
@Danama Papers
I agree broadly, although I argue that Medicare would need to be expanded to areas dental, treatment in private hospitals, etc. For our Medicare to fully resemble Sander’s ‘Medicare’ for All proposal.
Also, such an expansion of our Medicare would end up destroying the Private Health Insurance industry, that is already in decline.
It’s definitely possible that Hillary didn’t have any neurological damage from her thrombosis. My point was not that she was a ‘cripple’ or whatever, after her (possible/it’s a technicality) stroke, but that it doesn’t make sense to me to make a point about one candidate being unfit for the job because of a heart attack, while another is A-OK despite having had a blood clot on their brain.
Oh dear, someone has wandered into this very reasonable chat about the Nevada count and dropped their guts.
I often wonder if people here have actually looked up Buttigeig’s platform. It strikes me as reasonably progressive, really. No, nowhere near Sanders level, but – apart from a few niggles here and there – it satisfies this particular lefty, at least.
It would just be nice if Pete actually spoke about it from time to time instead of relying on banal catchphrases about “new kinds of politics” and “meeting the moment”, whatever the fuck that’s supposed to mean.
Klobucher and Biden are certainly more on the centrist side of the centre-left, and Klobucher in particularly is a bit too wishy-washy on climate change for my tastes, but it’s still night and day between them and Trump / the GOP. Bloomberg’s very strong on climate change, but otherwise is a centrist / moderate right on pretty much everything else, and seems pretty indistinguishable from Republicans in at least a few areas.
To compare to Aus politics – bearing in mind the very different cultural landscapes and historical baggage, and of course that the parties on both sides can differ heavily from state to state, candidate to candidate, and election to election – I’d probably say each roughly fits in the following categories:
Bernie: Solid green
Warren: Somewhere between Greens and Labor Left
Buttigeig: Pragmatic Labor left / centre
Klobucher and Biden: Labor right
Bloomberg: Moderate Lib
Trump and the modern GOP: Even further right than most of the Aus Libs and Nats, to the point where they’d probably decry the Morrison government as a bunch of lefty socialist SJWs. At least our conservatives try to *pretend* they care about climate change.
So Bernie has the Big Mo- and my suspicion of his running off with Bloomberg for the honour of kicking Dotard’s butt is a step closer.
And questions about the two septagurian’s ages, well Rupert is 89 and happily ruling over us.
And the Trump term doesn’t end with two. They are already priming the public for Don Jnr’s run in 2024.
sprocket_:
Mark solved.
Confessions @ #131 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 5:02 pm
Don Jr. is too busy shooting defenceless grizzlies.
As for where Bernie sits on the spectrum – clearly on the Labor Left.
Free education and Medicare for All is exactly what Whitlam established for the ALP.
To compare Bernie with the Greens is ridiculous, as they have never been in government, nor are they ever likely to, and so have never had the opportunity to implement any of their grandiose plans.
I reckon Ivanka will get the Trumpublican nomination ahead of DonJr
Danama Papers,
While we’re on the subject, Medicare in Australia IS FREE(!) …to people on very low incomes.
You’re obviously not on a very low income. If you were, as I am, you would know that there are things that you have to pay for now if you want to access them under Medicare.
For example, my son went to a Urologist. He refused to Bulk Bill him even though we/I am on a DSP. He also refused to see him at the Public Hospital Outpatient Urology Clinic and my son’s condition was so serious that we didn’t have the time to wait for an appointment anyway. Plus my GP said there are only 2 on the Coast that are competent enough to treat him and both of them refuse to Bulk Bill.
We did go to the Outpatient Urology Clinic for the operation follow-up, because we couldn’t afford to go back again to the Specialist. They were hopeless, inexperienced Registrars who had never come across my son’s condition before and told us basically useless information.
And that’s just one example. Another is the fact I need an ultrasound and the place closest to my house charges everyone for them now. However, if I want to travel an hour I can still get it done by a Bulk Billing service.
I could go on and on, but if you don’t believe Labor when they say Medicare is being privatised by stealth, then it’s no wonder Labor struggles to get the message across.
The situation isn’t as simplistic as you characterised it.
To compare Bernie with the Greens is ridiculous, as they have never been in government, nor are they ever likely to, and so have never had the opportunity to implement any of their grandiose plans.
Neither will Bernie Sanders ever be.
sprocket:
Either way it’s still a terrible outcome.
Bellwether @ #129 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 5:00 pm
You mean the Bernie Sanders circle jerk?
Words like “never” and “always” have no place in US presidential races. Not after 2016. I have some pretty big reservations about Bernie’s chances myself, but to suggest he just cannot win is ridiculous. I can see a number of paths that lead him to winning enough electoral votes in November, provided both he and the broader Democratic machine don’t shit the bed
Mr Newbie @ #122 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 4:46 pm
So you would know that a Concussion isn’t one then. 😐
C@tmomma:
Of course, PR spin never conceals inconvenient truths.
Are you claiming she didn’t have a cavernous sinus thrombosis?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/31/hillary-clinton-doctors-clot-brain
Asha Leu @ #141 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 5:15 pm
They could do that and he’ll still lose. Just sayin’
Bernie Sanders is no Barack Obama.
Donald Trump + Rupert Murdoch + Vladimir Putin are ruthless foes.
Bernie Sanders has easily exploitable skeletons in his closet. He will be the easiest of targets to shoot down in flames. Look what they did to John Kerry, Purple Heart recipient!
I bet the Latino and African American Voter Suppression moves are already being made so as to cut Bernie Sanders base out from under him.
Being firmly in ABT camp myself – if Bernie does get the nomination, he would get my full some support.
ABT – Anyone But Trump is more important than taking your bat and ball home cause your preferred candidate(s) failed to win the nomination.
And as Ash says, after 2016 – ‘never’ does not exist in US political jargon
Asha Leu @ #140 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 5:15 pm
I know, people’s absolutism (not sure if that is the best word for it) drives me nuts. It’s pure unfettered arrogance, as if they have any real idea how things will unfold.
C@tmomma @ #137 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 2:10 pm
Oh, I do believe it, and am very horrified at the prospect.
At the time the MSM were decrying “Mediscare” I pointed out to them on Twitter that Turnbull spent $5m of taxpayer’s money to investigate its “outsourcing”. Of all the journos who didn’t block me immediately, only Murpharoo responded by stating that they only wanted to outsource the payments side of things. I responded with the fact that Medicare IS a payments system. That is its function, its whole raison d’etre. If you outsource that function, you have privatised it. To her credit, she didn’t join her mates and block me, however she didn’t reply to that.
Anyway, there are probably dozens of ways America could pay for a Medicare For All system. Firstly end the military boondoggles. Secondly, and its related to the first point, stop invading foreign countries to steal their natural resources. Thirdly repeal the Trump, Obama and Bush tax cuts, but only on the rich.
If those things were done, I guarantee the US treasury would be awash with enough cash to at least get started on a universal health care system.
“Ironically, their policies that the ALP supports or has introduced.”
***
Unlike Bernie, Labor doesn’t support a Green New Deal, they treat refugees who cross our borders terribly, are completely supportive of the establishment, don’t take tackling climate change or inequality seriously, don’t support the legalisation of marijuana (with the notable exception of the awesome ACT Greens/Labor gov of course), etc…
The Greens support all of those policies. This is one of the reasons why the establishment here in Australia, and in the case of this blog the Labor Right specifically, are seriously starting to panic along with their counterparts over in the Democratic establishment. They can’t understand why they’ve lost millions of votes to the Greens on the left or why Bernie is surging and gaining so much support.
But yes, it is rather strange that they are parroting similar lines to the ones the Coalition use against them when it comes to paying for things and you would think they’d be fully supportive of Medicare for All. Very odd. I also don’t understand why they are supportive of candidates who would fit pretty well into the Liberal party but yet supporting a candidate like Bernie who shares some policies with the Greens seems to be a bridge too far for them.
Mr Newbie @ #143 Sunday, February 23rd, 2020 – 5:20 pm
Yes, she had a blood clot on her brain after she fell. That isn’t a stroke.
She had neither an Ischaemic Stroke, an Intracerebral Haemorrhage, or a Transient Ischaemic Attack.
http://www.strokecenter.org/patients/about-stroke/what-is-a-stroke/
Or, are you trying to say that every sportsman or woman who has a concussion, or anyone who has a concussion from a fall or other cause, has in fact had a stroke?
What Is a Concussion?
A concussion is a type of traumatic brain injury—or TBI—caused by a bump, blow, or jolt to the head or by a hit to the body that causes the head and brain to move rapidly back and forth. This sudden movement can cause the brain to bounce around or twist in the skull, creating chemical changes in the brain and sometimes stretching and damaging brain cells.
https://www.cdc.gov/headsup/basics/concussion_whatis.html
Sounds like Hillary Clinton had a Concussion.