Seven Percent (7%): That's the RCP Difference Bernie vs Hillary Over Trump

[davidlynch]

According to RCP both Hillary and Bernie should beat Trump.

But Bernie beats Trump by a margin of 7% *more* than Hillary.

What is that extra safety margin of 7% worth?

Consider this: any unexpected turn of events could erase the razor thin advantage that Hillary currently has over Trump. And if the Democrats lose to Trump, we lose *everything.* Bernie supporters lose, Hillary supporters lose, including those that were hoping for a plumb job in the new Clinton administration.

So, if only in the name of self-interest, Hillary supporters need to really, really internalize that number:

S-E-V-E-N P-E-R-C-E-N-T

Maybe you aren't concerned. Maybe you think the Democrats don't really need any extra safety margin.

Maybe you think Hillary is going to crush Trump because he is moron.

You might be right. She might crush Trump. And, yes, Trump is a moron.

Remember Regan?

You could ignore history. You could gamble. Maybe you will win and get your beloved Hillary elected.

But if Hillary's RCP margin dwindles, clinging to her in defiance of reason and the math is insane. You could end up sinking this party and the nation as a whole with it.

I can imagine David Muir saying:

"It's the eve of the general election and the race is tightening, in fact it couldn't be closer, exit polls show Hillary and Trump in a dead heat 48.5% to 48.5%".

Haven't we seen this before? It always happens.

When the election hinges on voter turnout, as it always does, don't we want Bernie to be the nominee?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. This is what I think

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511888617

[MrMickeysMom]

5. Apparently you have the same problem as the poster did in the link you have to them...

"That is literally what they are saying"...

And, like the person who called THAT statement out, you also need to look up the definition of "literally".

Do you like to mimic false statements, or do you have anything to personally say about it?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. Are we quibbling about semantics?

Yes, "literally" was a poor descriptor, but the poster captured the essence of the argument being put forward. And that argument is the votes of some folks deserve more weight than others. It's a noxious sentiment and I will go to my death believing it is so.

I can't believe anybody who holds themselves out as a progressive would make such an argument.

[mooseprime]

2. support for clinton

is largely faith based. resorting to facts doesn't seem to make any headway, it only agitates them. the denial is so monumental you almost want to stand up and salute.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. It is based on math-3,000,000 more popular votes and nearly 300 more pledged delegates

I know to committed revolutionaries, especially internet ones, niceties like respecting the popular vote is nothing more than bourgeoisie claptrap.

[msongs]

3. hinges on turnout????? hillary has 3 million MORE votes than bernie. now that is turnout nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. The Pugs should have just ignored the pop vote and nominate Kasich.

He was beating everybody.