Clinton Did NOT Win Equal Delegates in New Hampshire

I swear, if one more person shares a link with me about how Clinton won the same amount of  delegates as Bernie Sanders in New Hampshire I’m going to scream. Maybe I won’t but I want to. In my opinion it’s another shady political tactic by her camp to steal the thunder from Bernie’s complete shellacking of her in New Hampshire. Take a deep breath and relax.

A superdelegate is not the same as a delegate that you win in a primary or caucus. See HERE.

Clinton DID NOT win equal delegates in New Hampshire. See below.

Bernie NH delegates

That’s weird, I’m seeing a ton of people going batshit crazy about how she tied him but according to this graphic Bernie got 15 delegates and she got 9. The superdelegate myth is a another one of the questionable tools in the Clinton toolbox used to suppress the opposition. Her camp knows that the majority of the superdelegates will follow the popular vote but that doesn’t stop them from spreading the narrative that he can’t win.

They don’t count the superdelegates yet and let’s not forget that Clinton had the superdelegate edge over Obama in 2008 and many of them switched teams, just as they will this time. Make no mistake, he’ll get his share of superdelegates.  Relax.

Please contribute to Bernie Sanders’ Official Campaign HERE

Please take a moment and “Like” The Bern Report on Facebook HERE


G.A. Casebeer

60 thoughts on “Clinton Did NOT Win Equal Delegates in New Hampshire

  • February 10, 2016 at 12:39 pm

    Thank you. I appreciate you dispelling the myth.

  • February 10, 2016 at 12:47 pm

    Please put me on the list to receive the Bern Report so I can keep up with my Hero !!

  • February 10, 2016 at 1:10 pm

    Thank you for the real numbers. We can only go on what we get so please have patience. We are looking out that Bernie is not being cheated. It WOULD be wonderful if accurate information is given. We are only concerned voters doing the best we can. Someone is misleading us. Sincerely, Veronica Pais A BERNIE SANDERS VOTER

  • February 10, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    Spread the word far and wide!

    We The People will NOT be denied!

  • February 10, 2016 at 1:40 pm

    You are 100% correct but it is important that people understand she came away with the super delegates that she can buy .. not win. Unless you can correct me that a super delegate does not count in Philli, she did not win by any means, but she still walks away with delegates that she did not have to ‘earn’

    She had around 350 super delegates in her pocket. Don’t these count in Philli?

  • February 10, 2016 at 1:56 pm

    Yes. These defeatist articles are classic gaslighting attempts by big money. Stand fast. Don’t share non-encouraging uplifting Bernie forward momentum news. Stay positive and no ad hominem (those are attacks by losers on the person rather than issues) Allow Hillary to bury herself in the wealth – we need to GAIN more voters. PUSH by donating all month! #feelthebern

  • February 10, 2016 at 2:48 pm

    But Hillary got 15 and Bernie got 15…

  • February 10, 2016 at 2:57 pm

    Don’t yell at me. I watched MSNBC this morning and they had her with 1 less delegate than he had.

  • February 10, 2016 at 3:23 pm

    Apparently, superdelegates can be bought and sold, but the bottom line is they want their party to win, so if they know Bernie has a vast majority of the popular vote, they will vote his way, no matter what they promise another candidate. We need to keep contributing to Bernie’s campaign, we need to get out and vote, and we need to make sure our superdelegates absolutely know where the popular vote lies.

  • February 10, 2016 at 4:13 pm

    The discussion is in regards to the Super Delegates. The 24 in your post are just the normal delegates. 5 of the super have pledged to HRC.

  • February 10, 2016 at 4:55 pm

    Thank you for sending this. The inaccurate information has been driving me crazy. I love that so many have caught the bern, but most need to cheer Bernie on, vote for Bernie, and stop posting misinformation! Thanks.

  • February 10, 2016 at 5:00 pm

    Hello Bernreport,
    You need to dig a little more – it’s Bernie and sympathetic websites that are making these claims. The motive? To make it all appear to be some establishment hatchet job.
    Further, under the New Hampshire rules for proportional delegates and Super Delegates, Super Delegates can vote for any candidate they wish for the nominee regardless of the popular vote. 6 pledged support for Hillary. The popular vote divides the remaining delegates proportionally. Thus, Hillary ends up with more delegates or at least tied with Sen. Sanders. Sen. Sanders knew the rules going into New Hampshire, but it seems now he and his denizens want to change the rules regarding the allocation of delegates after the fact. Socrates did not like the rules of Athens when those rules dictated his death. However, rather than run at the moment the rules of Athens did not benefit him, Socrates chose death. Man up Bernie. Move on to another state and start winning under the rules.

  • February 10, 2016 at 5:11 pm

    Thanks for clarifying. It was all rather confusing.
    I believe Hillary and Bernie both have qualities that are important right now for our country, and come November I’ll support whichever candidate gets the nomination.

  • February 10, 2016 at 6:34 pm

    Thanks for this clarification, as I was about to go batshit crazy (but you pulled me back from the ledge). However, I find the whole concept of a superdelegate (which is a new thing to me btw) to be completely undemocratic. If I understand it correctly, because these individuals are powerful party insiders, they get more of a say about who gets nominated as the party’s candidate, than the individual voters in that party.

    It is fine to say that ‘the majority of the superdelegates will follow the popular vote’, but they are not required to. The fact that they have the power to throw their considerable weight towards the candidate of their own personal choice completely undermines the democratic process (in my opinion).

  • February 10, 2016 at 6:50 pm

    Even msnbc has been reporting all day that Clinton walks away with an equal number of delegates from New Hampshire. I was so ripping mad, I called every listed “super delegate” in New Hampshire as well as the DNC headquarters in Washington, D.C.

  • February 10, 2016 at 6:54 pm

    I’m glad I found this article. Why are the media outlets reporting the number of delegates to each of the candidates and the number includes the super delegates that have all gone for Clinton?

  • February 10, 2016 at 8:22 pm

    OK deal. Then all y’all are gonna stop spreading the ridiculous, false “she got 6 delegates in 6 consecutive winning coin toss” stories that Bernies supporters are still repeating right? Or did “she” start that one too?

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:18 pm

    It’s funny, I’m a Hillary supporter and I like this piece. Super delegates pledge their vote but they don’t actually control what happens. There may be Clinton supporters intentionally trying to suppress the enthusiasm about Bernie’s impressive win, but there are also Bernie supporters trying to exaggerate the clout and threat that Hillary poses to democracy. Both sides, mostly the latter, have flooded my feed with reports of them walking away with the same number of delegates. They didn’t. Bernie won more delegates and if he pulls away with the people’s votes then the super delegates will go to him as well. Thank you for posting this and clarifying the process, it’s important to be accurate and precise when evaluating the progress of candidates and campaigns.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:42 pm

    Superdelegates are not like other delegates – only in that they are not chose by popular vote. They are appointed party insiders. Other than that, their votes count equally with the others toward the total of 32 for New Hampshire. I believe they said they are committed to Clinton, as have many superdelegates already. She could win the majority of delegates.

    Last time it did not work. It very well could this time, with the fix in with the DNC.

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:52 pm

    Clinton did not get the same NUMBER of delegates as Bernie.

  • February 11, 2016 at 12:40 am

    To start with, your facts are wrong. New Hampshire has 8 “unpledged delegates” or superdelegates, as they are commonly called. Secondly, those contracts are not written in blood (see 2008). Third, that false delegate count is plastered almost everywhere, by almost every news organization but I’ve yet to see a list of these superdelegates that say they will vote against the wishes of the people they represent. With the kind of numbers he put up there that is literally political suicide for them. If however, you can provide me a verifiable list like I mentioned earlier, then I might be a believer, until then I’ll go with Bernie has 15 delegates and HRC has 9.

  • February 11, 2016 at 12:43 am

    Do you REALLY think with the numbers Bernie just turned in that those politicians are going to commit political suicide by voting against the wishes of their constituents? BTW, there are 8 unpledged or superdelegates, she has said she has 6 of them. Not once have I seen a list of any of them saying they will vote against what their own supporters want.(The media doesn’t count) Until I see that, Bernie has 15 and HRC has 9.

  • February 11, 2016 at 12:55 am

    Bernie got 15 and she got 9. That is the official number of pledged delegates. HRC claims she has 6 of the 8 unpledged or superdelegates so that’s number the media has ran with. However, do you REALLY think that those politicians will commit political suicide for her? Not very likely and with Bernie’s massive support there, voting them out is not only possible but almost inevitable if they vote against the will of their constituents.

  • February 11, 2016 at 12:59 am

    I seriously doubt they will commit political suicide for her. And they don’t vote until July, so no one has been “awarded” any superdelegates yet. She says she has 6 of the 8 there but you have to consider that they said that back when she was ahead by ungodly numbers and her having the popular vote looked like a lock.

  • February 11, 2016 at 1:30 am

    At the end of the day, the superdelegates want the same thing: for their party to win. That’s why the superdelegates are, at this stage, “pledged” and not “secured.” They are “secured” in July at the DNC. The media is clearly hyping up this issue to help the establishment prop up their candidate, who seems to be failing to inspire voters in the same way as her opponent. Spreading misinformation isn’t likely to help her campaign, however, since NH exit polls show she’s not faring well on the “honesty and trustworthy” scale. In short, it’s waaaaaaaaaay to early in the campaign to be concerned about superdelegates. Worry about it in May, when we’re nearing the DNC, if the race is still close by then…lets hope it’s not.

  • February 11, 2016 at 2:23 am

    It appears to me that the rule allowing super-delegates falls into the same category as the rule for corporations to donate as individuals. They are both a corruption of the democratic process – one vote per qualified individual. When Bernie is elected, I pray that he corrects these aberrations in all their forms .

  • February 11, 2016 at 6:29 am

    I beg to differ with Mr. Casebeer. His predictions work only if this is not a close election. It’s likely to be a squeaker and the superdelegates, the Democratic Party’s oligarch squad, have every interest in maintaining the status quo that Bernie is promising to upset. They’ve pledged with Clinton and it’s likely they’ll stick with her — and that could very easily upset the will of the people as expressed in their primary votes.

    I’d be finding out who those superdelegates are, listing their contact information, and hammering them to vote the will of the people, not their own special interests — and exposing without mercy those who will not.

  • February 11, 2016 at 8:23 am

    Would someone please explain to me WHY there are such things as “super delegates” in the first place? I’m 65, have voted in every election since I became eligible, and I don’t recall anything about super-delegates from “back in the old days.” Maybe I just pay closer attention to the process since I got older? Why do we need super delegates anyway? It’s as awful and idea as the “electoral college.”

  • February 11, 2016 at 8:28 am

    I agree, once I learned of the electoral college in junior high school I realized my vote would never really count as most Americans are continually lead to believe. I think it is time for tamper-proof voter-varifiable internet voting. That way we can vote on any issue, even local isses, anytime from our homes smartphones, or from the computers in the public library. We now have the technology for a truer democracy. Spread the word!

  • February 11, 2016 at 8:31 am

    Thank you Eric! I’ve been getting this story in my feed from SANDERS supporters claiming it shows how he’s being cheated and it’s rigged etc (like the bogus claims they make of Hillary winning ” 6 delegates in 6 consecutive coin tosses in Iowa which is clearly a false narrative to delegitimization her narrow win). Interesting the Administrator here does not even address your initial claim that it’s Sanders camp who are making hay wit his story nor do they refute your fact that both sanders ann Clinton knew the rules in Iowa and NH going in. Nothing has changed.

  • February 11, 2016 at 10:45 am

    The only posts I have seen are from Bernie supporters trying to make the super delegate issue a Clinton/Democratic Party conspiracy against Bernie. You trying to now spin it that these posts by Bernie supporters are actually a conspiracy by Clinton and her supporters is very telling. No matter what, it must be Hillary Clinton’s fault. THIS is why I refuse to support Bernie. Because he has done NOTHING to stop these ridiculous claims by his supporters. He HAS done everything he possibly can to paint Hillary as a corrupt politician with no real proof. He has insinuated and insinuated and let his supporters run with it. It is disgusting and is doing major damage to the progressive cause. STOP IT!

  • February 11, 2016 at 12:11 pm

    James, it’s not so much Sanders supporters making hay with this story, as much as it is them calling out a non-story being propagated by many mainstream news organizations (as well as blog posts and social media posts). Those pledged delegates didn’t vote on February 9th with the rest of New Hampshire and get locked into their support of a candidate. They vote at the convention in July and don’t have to commit until that time. So they can change their support whenever they want to for whatever reason. In the history of the superdelegate system, the superdelegates have never overridden the nomination of a candidate who had the support of the country through the popular vote. The fact that we’re even talking about superdelegates in February is completely and utterly pointless. The only reason the story exists is because Hillary’s PR people know that if people see numbers like Hillary leading Bernie with 410 superdelegates to 14, Bernie’s supporters who don’t understand the process will feel as though his chances of getting the nomination are slim, and there’s no point in voting for him in a primary.

  • February 11, 2016 at 1:56 pm

    Yes, yes you will be denied. Because the whole system is rigged and corrupt. Bern doesn’t stand a chance in hell because the Hill & her Bill are SUPERPLAYERS of this scam, this corrupt farce which is our electoral system. Ron Paul was royally screwed in 2012 and Bern will be screwed in 2016. And if rigging the system doesn’t work, they will hack the voting machines and sell out that way. ….we need to fix the process FIRST at the polls, because like Stalin said, “It doesn’t matter how the people vote, it matters WHO COUNTS that vote.” (paraphrased from the Russian…)…keep plugging away though so you can see for yourself how hopeless the situation is…it took me 5 years to understand the whole rotten mess. Enough people will eventually wake the hell up and then something to fix it all might happen, but there aren’t enough people either awake or mad enough yet.

  • February 11, 2016 at 2:23 pm

    Actually in my media circles I’m seeing this Clinton tool as backfiring. People I know are infuriated that these idiots at the end of the day can vote for whoever they damn well please regardless of the will of the voters. Pissed that the super delegate even exists without voter influence and thus plan to vote for him in spite of the all this nonsense. If anything it’s help him in my view.

  • February 11, 2016 at 3:49 pm

    Brent, I’m saying from my point of view it looks EXACTLY like Team Sanders is spreading the delegate story to further delegitimize ANY gains she has/makes. I got several posts in my feed from Sanders supporters about the super delegates claiming it showed how rigged the system is, now you’re claiming it’s counter intel from her? Similarly the bogus Iowa coin toss story which Sanders did NOTHING to quash even though it was proven total BS, all while his campaign mngr added whatever language he could to call Iowa into question. I am a life long Liberal Dem. I am also a realist. I can’t stand this double standard and purity test which Suddenly Hillary must be judges by. I didn’t hear any of this crap against Obama. And Bernie’s team can steal her confidential voter strategy data, masquerade as union officials in Nevada, have an unofficial PAC follow him around Iowa and spend a million dollars in adds and nobody blinks. Does everyone have amnesia about how Nader enabled Bush to steal the election then? You do hear Bernie say his entire platform depends on a never before scene level of voter mobilization AND continued ongoing involvement in down ticket elections AND suitable strong and financially backed candidates in those races right? If Obama couldn’t do it how can he? A failure now or a failed 1 term Sanders administration will set us back another 25 years.

  • February 11, 2016 at 3:54 pm

    Exactly Karen! Me too. Similarly me and other Hillary supporters I know are not s[reading this vitriolic level of attacks against Bernie it’s coming the other way. We agree with his Liberal positions but feel he either can’t win or if he does he will never be able to mobilize and engage the vast new voter block he admits he needs to be get anything done. Meanwhile his side is trying to turn off voters from our side if she’s the nominee. WTF does that get us. ANd please don’t ell me you’d all rather “teach the party a lesson” even if it means losing. Does no one remember Nader? That worked out great for us.

  • February 11, 2016 at 4:12 pm

    The point here should be the fact that there are super delegates. Why? Why do they exist? hmmm that’s a mystery!

  • February 11, 2016 at 4:43 pm

    I played it like this. There was a website that discussed the topic that provided a link to a petition. I expressed my view that superdelegates should vote the will of the people. There is a strong grass-roots movement on social media among Bernie supporters. I dont get the impression that its the Sanders camp running this story. And most of the stories I’ve seen are pointing to the petition.

  • February 11, 2016 at 8:21 pm

    Are you kidding? Ron Paul wasn’t even close.

    Now, I’m not saying the system isn’t rigged, but Sanders is really going to give them a run for their money. Whether he wins or loses, this is going to be close. Can’t say the same of Ron Paul, who was never anywhere close to a majority, even within one party let alone nationally.

  • February 11, 2016 at 9:35 pm

    Still, it will all depend on how strong Bernie’s performance is. The party steps on the will of their electorate at their own grave peril. It’s down to power, baby, and if Bernie has it, they won’t mess with him if they know what’s good for the future of the Democratic Party.

  • February 12, 2016 at 1:12 am

    Hi there, I discovered your website by way of Google at the same time as looking for a comparable subject, your site got here up, it seems great.
    I’ve bookmarked it in my google bookmarks.
    Hi there, simply become alert to your blog through Google, and found
    that it is really informative. I am gonna be careful for brussels.
    I’ll appreciate should you continue this in future.
    Many other people will probably be benefited
    out of your writing. Cheers!

  • February 12, 2016 at 3:03 am

    I appreciate your point, very much. The problem is in having a delegate system and an Electoral College at this point in our political system. There should not be a waiting game to find out who gets the win in any primary or election when the actual popular vote has already been accurately determined. We have the technology to allow for a real one person = one vote election system. It’s time to make every vote count.

  • February 12, 2016 at 7:08 am

    Daniel, denise is talking about at the Primary convention. Ron Paul’s delegates were treated very unfairly. Even states where Paul made a huge showing — with the delegates to prove it — were still subjected to terribly shady and unforgivably undemocratic tactics to prevent them from representing. Watch here:

  • February 12, 2016 at 7:32 am

    Yes, the superdelegates are free to switch their allegiance and most likely will, if Bernie is the people’s choice. But the issue is the HRC is using this support of the Democratic Party establishment to spin her story and intimidate primary voters into voting for her because Bernie doesn’t have the backing of the party insiders. You see, the system IS rigged. DNC superdelegates were created to maintain the status quo by giving extra weight to those Democrats who were elected (or, in some cases, merely appointed) in the past. The system is, by definition, un-democratic. Superdelegates came about as a reaction to changes made by the McGovern (remember George?)-Fraser Commission following the 1968 DNC (if you didn’t see it then, check it out) that were intended to wrest control of the nominating process from the party establishment and give more weight to the wishes of Democratic primary voters. (What a novel concept.) In 1982 the Hunt Commission turned it around, putting control of the nominating process back in the hands of the insiders. There’s your history lesson. As an earlier comment said… the DNC and party establishment can ignore the will of the voters, but it will be at their peril. Then again, maybe it’s time for the two-party system to die.

  • February 12, 2016 at 7:41 am

    Hi Rebecca, please see my post below. What’s fascinating is that it stems from the bloody days of the 1968 DNC, which I expect you remember. I was 13–it was fascinating and frightening at the same time, and had me in tears more than once. War in Vietnam, war in our streets (Watts, Detroit, Chicago)… those were turbulent times.

  • February 12, 2016 at 10:09 am

    The problem with voter-verifiable voting is that it makes it possible for other people to verify the vote, too, which makes it possible for wealthy people or corporations to pay people to vote a certain way, and to verify that they voted that way.

  • February 12, 2016 at 2:17 pm

    ” When Bernie is elected, I pray that he corrects these aberrations in all their forms”
    See, that comment and many like it from the Sanders supporters I know, perfectly sums up why, while I support his views I cant get behind him and his “everybody gets a pony” campaign. Yes, St. Bernie’s gonna give us election reform, free college, universal health care, economic equality, and prison reform. Why didn’t we think of demanding that before? It’s so simple! Oh that’s right, he’s going to forge a wave of continuously energized and engaged voters and candidates in all states. ‘Cause Obama couldn’t do it! Sorry I live in the real world and don’t have the luxury of voting for the candidate who “makes me feel good to pull the lever for”.

  • February 12, 2016 at 7:58 pm

    and i saw on CNN’s website they gave each of them the same # of delegates.

  • February 13, 2016 at 11:12 am

    The party leaders of the dnc aka superdelegates will not abandon a democrat to support and independent. President Obama was a democrat and so was Hillary however Bernie is NOT A DEMOCRAT therefore expecting our party leaders to abandon our candidate for an independent is ridiculous. Hell let’s have the superdelegates support bloomberg if he jumps into the race

  • February 14, 2016 at 11:12 am

    Being a liberal child of the 60″s I’ve been waiting for Bernie all of my life. On the other hand I’ve come to the point where I no longer wish to call myself a Democrat because I don’t believe individuals make history. Forces do that. Parties are that force so my quandary is, how can I continue to support a party that has failed the acid test by institutionalizing the possibility of disenfranchising me as a voter? Even if I supported the platform on all other issues the Super Delegate abomination makes the party itself a non starter for me to the point that even though I was a professed lifelong Democrat I voted for McCain. Why? Because at the time it was a vote, not for the candidate who is an individual, but rather against the party that is the force. I truly believe that Presidents don’t wield power nearly as much as they attempt to cope with the power of others. Imagine this scenario. The race between Hillary and Bernie is close with Bernie in front. The Democratic Party uses the Super Delegates to rob Bernie of the nomination causing a storm of anti party reaction from otherwise staunch Democrats. Trump being perceived as a Democrat in Republican clothing becomes President.

  • February 14, 2016 at 11:50 am

    what a dumb thing to say as if no one on this page understands that hilldebeast isnt even a centrist (bernie is left and obama is a centrist) and she belongs in the republican party. The only reason the Clintons weaseled their way into the DNC years ago was at the behest of their establishment masters. You are probably a representative of evil as well.

    Hillary- for the death penalty = right
    Hillary- against single payer care = right
    Hillary- does not consider young black men to have a consciousness = absolute disgrace to humanity

  • February 14, 2016 at 11:51 pm


  • February 14, 2016 at 11:53 pm


  • February 18, 2016 at 2:15 am

    Excellent post. I was checking constantly this weblog and I’m inspired!
    Extremely useful info particularly the ultimate phase 🙂 I handle such
    information much. I used to be looking for this
    particular information for a long time. Thank you and best of luck.

  • February 22, 2016 at 3:38 pm

    HRC did not win an equal number of delegates in the primary, but she has the same number of delegates committed to her. Super delegates are real, unelected delegates. The equal counts only count super delegates who have pledged their votes (not all of them have). To point out the truth that the Party establishment has a process to stack the decks to make it very difficult for an insurgent candidate to get the nomination even if that person is the most popular is not an offense. It is not a myth that an equal number of NH delegates with a vote at the National Convention are committed to HRC as are committed to Bernie. It is factual. True, the super delegates don’t have a legal obligation to vote for the candidate to whom they are pledged, but it would be dangerous to assume they’ll all just switch their votes if Bernie wins the overall popular vote. A few might, but it’s unlikely there will be a wholesale abandonment of HRC by super delegates.

Leave a Reply