• LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    This seems to be a complete misunderstanding of how the primary system works. I am saying that Bernie won West Virginia and got the majority of those delegates that could be won that day. That is winning the state. The super delegates get lumped in but they aren’t a part of the same process. Bernie won WV because he got the most votes even if he didn’t get the super delegates he still won the state. You could literally look at my source I provided and you’d see that he won.

    I’d recommend separating the super delegates from the situation and look at it just for what the delegates were up at the time of the vote. Thats what determines who won the state.

    Even better, just look around this wikipedia article to see who won what states and everything. It’s all right there. I’m just repeating the literal reality of how it went down.

    • GuyFawkesV@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I think @[email protected]’s point is that if one doesn’t receive the most votes from the State when it’s all said and one they didn’t really “win” that State. They may have gotten more voter votes, but the they didn’t win the overall vote count from the State (voter+superdelegate) so it’s not really a “win” Bernie took 2nd in WV votes that mattered.

    • DaMummy@hilariouschaos.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      60 minutes ago

      So Clinton got more total delegates if you just separate the vote count from the equation? Is that what you’re telling me. Because that’s literally what I’m trying to say to you. That votes don’t matter(or at least didn’t in the 2016 dem primary) and even if a candidate wins 100% of the counties in a state, they can still lose in the thing that matters, delegates.