LuckyNumber7
Blue Crack Addict
He’s running at half to 2/3rds support than he ran at in 2016. And in 2016, the CA primary was in June, after he had already lost.
Even though Warren and Bloomberg are sharing 25-30% of the vote, he wouldn’t even get half of that. They cost Biden far more votes. And this was supposed to be Bernie’s big prize.
I’m sorry but you just ignored my entire counter point. Explain to me why Joe Biden can’t get over 25% in California.
You’re just plugging your ears. There’s a big difference between having five or six candidates on the ballot and two. It’s obnoxious to think that of the other 41% that isn’t Biden or Sanders, you genuinely think that Sanders can’t take 20% of that. In California. Really, all he “needs” to match his 2016 numbers is about 13%, anyways. Like holy hell, how biased do you have to be to genuinely believe that that’s not possible?
And your point about the election happening after he had already lost is also circular and moot. You can’t quantify if he got more or less support in California because of the election already being over. It’s not clear which voters were more disinterested - Clinton’s or Sanders’.
You can keep going with alternative math all you want but your point just doesn’t hold up.
Sanders has lost support because he isn’t everyone’s first choice, but the same isn’t true for the losing candidate.