BREAKING: Hillary Clinton wins Democratic nomination for president

The Associated Press reported moments ago that Hillary Clinton now has enough delegates to become the Democratic nominee for president.

The AP has kept a running tally of overall delegates, including super delegates.

FullSizeRender (1)

The Boston Globe is one of the first outlets up with a full story:

Clinton, the former secretary of state, New York senator and first lady, reached the 2,383 delegates needed to become the presumptive Democratic nominee on Monday with a decisive weekend victory in Puerto Rico and a burst of last-minute support from superdelegates. Those are party officials and officeholders, many of them eager to wrap up the primary amid preference polls showing her in a tightening race with presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump.

Clinton has 1,812 pledged delegates won in primaries and caucuses. She also has the support of 571 superdelegates, according to an Associated Press count.

The AP surveyed all 714 superdelegates repeatedly in the past seven months, and only 95 remain publicly uncommitted.

AP now has its story up as well:

Striding into history, Hillary Clinton will become the first woman to top the presidential ticket of a major U.S. political party, capturing commitments Monday from the number of delegates needed to become the Democrats’ presumptive nominee.

The victory arrived nearly eight years to the day after she conceded her first White House campaign to Barack Obama. Back then, she famously noted her inability to “shatter that highest, hardest glass ceiling.”

Campaigning this time as the loyal successor to the nation’s first black president, Clinton held off a surprisingly strong challenge from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. He mobilized millions with a fervently liberal message and his insurgent candidacy revealed a deep level of national frustration with politics-as-usual, even among Democrats who have controlled the White House since 2009.

Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis  — Win a pony! (not really)

CyberDisobedience on Substack | @aravosis | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

73 Responses to “BREAKING: Hillary Clinton wins Democratic nomination for president”

  1. Zoey says:

    I’m okay with anyone but Trump! I want that clown out! He is most annoying personality ever. I’m not as good as John Oliver’s team when it comes to research, but there is enough proof out there to prove how dumb Drumpf is –! I don’t know what about him is so appealing that people are actually VOTING for him! God save our country.

  2. Zoey says:

    Thanks! That’s sensibility talking…Such views are such rarity these days!

  3. 2karmanot says:

    We’ve been Bernie supporters since his Vermont days. He is the real deal. Hillary in her pre-ordained anointment as the Democratic candidate can enjoy the kerfuffle her flying slander monkey’s have created to denigrate Bernie and his supporters all she wants, but I would remind her and her rabid groupies here that 11 million of us voted for Sanders and I say, don’t vote for her…not one of us. Deny her our vote unless she and her minions start kissing major ass and soon.

  4. dcinsider says:

    Very pleased you picked up on that. It was intended.

  5. Webster says:

    Certainly not the ones who are paying attention, that’s for sure… (Sad, ain’t it?)

  6. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Not the citizens of the U.S.A.

  7. Webster says:

    And the winner is…

  8. 2karmanot says:

    She will be exactly like Obama, but a touch more bloodthirsty. Her first year will put forth many Kabuki inadequate ‘incremental’ adjustments to existing mediocrities like Obama Care garnering much positive propaganda and delivering virtually nada. She will up environmental degradation with fracking and other odious land use schemes and call it progress. etc…etc

  9. 2karmanot says:

    The LGTB community has made a difference this time. Two of the most influential GLTB blogs have gone 95 % for Hillary and spent plenty of bile time slandering Sanders and his supporters. My guess many of these Clinton enthusiasts are bourgeois liberals financially secure and removed from the roiling troubles of inequity in this new system. Too many have forgotten Hillary’s defense of DOMA and DADT as the most sensible and expedient solution at the time. I find it extremely disheartening that so many of my old friends have gone Killery. The 4 million of us that have voted for Bernie will not forget.

  10. 2karmanot says:

    I am one of the 4 million who voted for Bernie. I offer my condolences to the Democratic Party for its anointment of Hillary by hook or crook, because if she ascends to the Presidency the last nail in the coffin of the New Deal will be hammered and corporate oligarchy will finally be established.

  11. 2karmanot says:

    I think full of crap applies here.

  12. Bill_Perdue says:

    I won’t vote for an anti-LGBTQ bigot a racist a warmonger or a union buster.
    that means I won’t be voting for any Democrat or Republican.

    On November 8, 2016 vote Socialist or Labor, vote for good referendums and if there aren’t any Left candidates write in Chelsea Manning or join the majority in sitting it out.

    “It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don’t want and get it.” – Eugene V. Debs

    Which anti-LGBTQ bigot, racist, warmonger and union buster will you be voting for? Clinton or Trump.

  13. Helenrscheele says:

    “my room mate Lori Is getting paid on the internet $98/hr”…..!tl303ur

    two days ago grey McLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over hourly. 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !tl303u:➽:➽:.➽.➽.➽.➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsCubeGetPay$98Hour…. .★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★::::::!tl303o….,…

  14. S. Parilla says:

    Voting for the stronger candidate in a two-party system (especially when the other option is a racist, misogynistic, fascist orangutan) is not how ‘throwing your vote away’ works, but thanks for the concern.

  15. B00Z says:

    either way, you’re throwing your vote away on a shyster

  16. B00Z says:

    If you have to ask, you won’t get it

  17. Plisko says:

    You’re not very good with metaphors are you? For the record I didn’t really think you were holding a pony either. . . but your condescension is duly noted.

  18. dcinsider says:

    I don’t subscribe to religious fantasy stories so I seriously doubt I’d be invoking the devil.

    However, always love hearing from the left wing Tea Party.

  19. Opinionated Cat Lover says:

    So. Clinton has enough support to win the nomination if it was held today. I’m not a big fan of her, and many of the other commentors have already expressed my concerns with Clinton.

    However, unlike some of the more militant commentors here, I’ll accept Clinton’s nomination. Why? Because obviously the people have spoken. Even if Sanders greatly outperforms expectations, he is still over 300 delegates down, and would need to take most if not all of California (which won’t happen as Hillary can easily get more than 15% and claim some of California’s delegates).

    I do hope that Sanders wing of the party gets a seat at the party, but as much as Clinton is dissed here, I actually remember a comfortable experience in the 90s, It may not be ideal by the Liberal measure, but it was far better than what came after…or what will happen should we let our ideological purity get in the way of the only sane candidate.

    PS: I supported Sanders in the Primary. I wish him the best of luck today. But soon, it’s going to be a choice between whoever emerges from this primary on Team Blue’s side, and the last clown standing from the clown car on Team Red’s side.

    And no matter how bad various elements say Clinton is, I’ll take her over that clown any day of the week. Hell. I’ll take a musty old boot over that clown….

  20. Don Chandler says:

    How many superdelegates did Hillary have at the beginning of the primaries? YOu know, before people voted. The dems really need to fix this undemocratic nonsense. These superspecial people have been doing this crap for years and it’s getting old in this modern internet society. Maybe the time is ripe for a third party now. Or multiple parties. The democracy is a sham.

  21. Outspoken1 says:


  22. Max_1 says:

    Except when they call early… it’s when other people are actually voting ON elections day… NOT the day BEFORE!!!

  23. Max_1 says:

    Following your line of logic… in ’08 on this date in history, HILLARY DROPS OUT.

    How’s your logic working now?

  24. hiker_sf says:

    Not only that, but gee, it couldn’t be a media slam against democracy or anything like that. . .

    Clinton Foundation donors include dozens of media organizations, individuals

  25. 2patricius2 says:

    So who are you going to vote for, Bill? Yourself? Someone else? Or do you think it doesn’t matter for whom you vote? Or are you rooting for Trump to win, thinking he will bring on the revolution that still hasn’t happened and will magically change the country for the better, rather than for the worse?

  26. Plisko says:

    So your argument is that the devil just gave us a pony and look at the bright shiny pretty pony?

  27. dcinsider says:

    Congratulations to our first woman candidate from either political party to be nominated as her party’s candidate for President.

    Can we all just accept that this is a historic moment and put aside the dreary, tired old arguments for a few hours?

    This is something important, whether you love her or hate her.

  28. Plisko says:

    It was true when she lost to Obama too. This is because there is no way to count an accurate popular vote in primaries. So pretending to count them is meaningless and pretending that the pretend count means something is dishonest.

  29. S. Parilla says:

    Agreed, and it wasn’t an accusation. Apologies if it came across as one.

    “My opponent is the political equivalent of a roaring dumpster fire” may not be the most inspiring argument for one’s cause, but it is an accurate one. Thankfully, it’s not the only reason to vote for her.

  30. Nelson Kerr says:

    Hilary won more actual votes.That will be true no matter what happens today

  31. Plisko says:

    Agreed. But my point still remains that we deserve to see how close it is and the press suddenly anointing Clinton the morning of a vote, over super delegates that don’t even vote yet, is undemocratically influencing the vote from actual voters. Everyone justifiably freaked out when Fox announced Bush beating Gore before the votes were finished being cast. This isn’t an unusual complaint if we really care about being a democracy.

    If they want to influence the vote so much they better be careful what they wish for.

  32. timncguy says:

    the number is 70%. The race is not neck & neck when he needs 70%. CA is not winner take all. All the states are proportional.

  33. Plisko says:

    Sanders was a spectator, not a candidate. You and I both know there is a difference. The delegate math I spoke of was just babbled on Good Morning America. I’m sure more articles will appear.

    There is around 300 pledged delegates between the two candidates. California alone has almost 500 up for grabs. Yet they are babbling things like “Sanders would need to win 90% of the delegates in all the states today in order to overcome Clinton.” Which is far more than he would need to get equal pledged delegates. The popular vote and the pledged delegates are not finished being counted yet. Am I not making that point well enough? This is like a horse race where the horse in the lead by a neck is declared the winner and paid out when they haven’t gotten to the finish line yet. Why do you accept that?

    My definition of the base includes everyone who has voted and everyone who has not voted yet that deserves to be heard before they declare their candidate. You and I both know the Democrats would not be nearly blown apart by an outsider if at least have of the people who vote for Democrats weren’t very unhappy.

  34. timncguy says:

    I also don’t understand your assertion that it is CLOSE. It is not close. In order for Sanders to take the lead among pledged delegates he will have to win all the contests today by 70 – 30. There is no way that will happen. And, this ins not new information. This margin of victory he will need has been publicized for weeks.

  35. timncguy says:

    wait, wait. You’ll have to provide a,link to anyone saying he needs to win enough pledged dels to overcome her lead with supers. No one has said that. If he takes the lead in pledged dels the supers would change to him just like they changed to Obama in 08

    You definition of the base must refer to a smaller group than mine because Clinton in winning more pledged and more popular votes. Aren’t those coming from the “base”? If not, where are they coming from?

    Trump would destroy the supreme court for generations. We are at a point when we can finally fix the supreme court. Now is not the time to blow that

    Lastly. In 08, Sanders endorsed Obama and declared him the nominee based on pledged and super delegates before Clinton dropped out and before the convention. So, the standard he was using in 08 for Obama he doesn’t approve of now in this race.

  36. goulo says:

    It was neither intended nor presented as an argument that one should not vote for Clinton.

    I was just remarking with a smile that a statement “Candidate X would be better than Trump” has pretty much zero information content, since nearly ANY candidate would be better than Trump – that bar is ridiculously tragicomically low.

  37. Plisko says:

    I think your last point is exactly why I am so angry. I want the contest. We really wouldn’t have known how close it all is until tonight.. Knowing how close it is should help the establishment realize it is failing it’s base. Yet, here is the press knowingly influencing the outcome of the primaries by claiming Clinton is a winner because of some new super delegate count. . . then claiming Sanders needs to win enough pledged delegates to overcome all the super delegates. So super delegate math wins when there are not enough pledged and they win when there are more pledged. Either way they choose. I can totally see the Clinton’s and the Democratic establishment using their press favors and orchestrating this behind the scenes because they DON’T want the public to see how close it is. So instead of realizing they have failed the base, they now circumvent the base to get what they want. How is that not a totally corrupt system that deserves to fail?

  38. S. Parilla says:

    I’ve seen that argument a number of times now, and it’s cute, but there are two choices this year: Hillary Clinton, or a (semi-? quasi-?)fascist. It’s not a hard choice to make.

  39. timncguy says:

    she conceded once she lost the argument with dem officials about counting FL and MI both at full strength which would have given her more pledged delegates and justified her popular vote argument. At that point she had no argument to make that she had won. So, for the good of the party, she conceded and endorsed Obama and spent all the time from June 7th up to the convention in late Aug unifying the party.
    Sanders will be at the same point after tonight. Or at the latest after the 14th when DC votes. At that point he should recognize that he has no argument left and concede and start the unifying process

  40. Plisko says:

    Looks like it was 312. And since she conceded while holding more of the popular vote, doesn’t that make her also someone with two sets of rules about what the popular vote means?

  41. Webster says:

    This is the perfect symbolic ending to the Democratic Party primary. The nomination is consecrated by a media organization, on a day when nobody voted, based on secret discussions with anonymous establishment insiders and donors whose identity the media organization – incredibly – conceals. The decisive edifice of super-delegates is itself anti-democratic and inherently corrupt: designed to prevent actual voters from making choices that the party establishment dislikes. But for a party run by insiders and funded by corporate interests, it’s only fitting that their nomination process ends with such an ignominious, awkward and undemocratic sputter.
    ~ Glenn Greenwald, “Perfect End to Democratic Primary: Anonymous Super-Delegates Declare Winner Through Media”

  42. timncguy says:

    it was closer than this one. Maybe around 100 pledged del diff compared to 285 now. And, if you counted the votes in FL & MI, which went too early based on DNC rules and weren’t counted, she actually had more popular vote than Obama.

  43. Plisko says:

    More voters? In a primary where every state makes decisions differently? And the voters haven’t all voted yet? And where it’s delegates not voters who decide? That seems like a bit of a stretch. Or propaganda.

  44. B00Z says:

    Jeebus Christ, this country is so fucking screwed

  45. Plisko says:

    How close was that count? I can’t remember.

  46. Plisko says:

    So you either have a running tally of every faithful report ever made on this issue or you are full of crap? Lets see your tally. I’ll count the AP as the first strike against you.

  47. Plisko says:

    Super delegates represent the corruption of our primary system not democracy and Puerto Rico doesn’t have any Presidential electors so they don’t participate in Presidential elections. The AP and the Clintons are trying to influence the public on the morning of the California Primary and they can both bite me.

  48. goulo says:

    So would George Bush! Being better than Donald Trump is setting the bar pretty low… :)

  49. TheNeedle says:

    Okay then, so all you Hillary voters can stay home and relax now.

  50. timncguy says:

    And on June 5 in 08 Bernie Sanders announced his endorsement of Obama as the presumptive nominee based on a combination of pledged and super delegates.

    Just like everyone else, Sanders has different rules for Clinton.

  51. Patriciabmiles2 says:

    “my room mate Lori Is getting paid on the internet $98/hr”…..!tr944ur

    two days ago grey McLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over hourly. 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !tr944u:➽:➽:.➽.➽.➽.➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsMaxGetPay$98Hour…. .★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★::::::!tr944o….,….

  52. timncguy says:

    it is news that Clinton went over the magic number with pledged & super delegates. It was reported in this same manner in 08 when Obama went over the magic number using pledged and super delegates. Guess who endorsed Obama in 08 and declared him the nominee on June 5th (2 months before the convention) and 2 days before Clinton conceded? Answer – Bernie Sanders.

  53. Bill_Perdue says:

    This is just an attempt to suppress the left moving Chicano/Chicana and Latina/Latino vote in California.

    Aren’t Democrats sneaky?

  54. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    I thought of that, but that’s still wrong. The media should report the news, not make it.

  55. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Actually Becca, the avatar remains because it reminds me of a time when the LGBT community made a big difference. It was a lot of hard work, and I enjoyed it. However, my husband found a job out here (California) that was a good fit for him and a definite boost in finances. I will vote tomorrow, because there will be a new senator. This whole thing is upsetting, but I won’t miss the caucus.

  56. Bill_Perdue says:

    It’s a moot point. HRH Trump and HRH HRC are doing so much damage to the right centrist RP and DP that they’re becoming even more irrelevant. The more elections they win and the more they govern for the rich the more they’ll power the radicalization.

  57. Bill_Perdue says:

    She won’t.

  58. Phil in FLL says:

    Actually, this has been one of the few years in which the California primary has been given some importance. Voters in California usually have little influence in the primaries, and the reason is the primary schedule, not some evil conspiracy. It’s not inconceivable that California—at some future time—might decide to move their primary much earlier in the season, like January. After all, there’s no law about it. But the present primary schedule is the reason that a candidate almost always has enough delegates for nomination before California votes. It is not a media conspiracy.

  59. Phil in FLL says:

    The various media outlets are also reporting the fact that the Sanders campaign makes the counterclaim that Hillary does not have sufficient delegates to win the nomination until the superdelegates vote on July 25. The media has faithfully reported the Sanders campaign’s counterclaim every time the Sanders campaign has made it. Sooooo… please don’t conclude that the Sanders campaign has been persecuted by the media. That persecution complex about the media is mostly the province of the Tea Party folks. Try not to imitate them in this respect.

  60. BeccaM says:

    No more so, Mike, than most of us in the western time zones during practically every election when they call it when Ohio or Florida results come in.

    Your vote still matters. And I hope you are also paying attention to ALL of the down-ballot primary candidates and your state’s initiative. And if, as your avatar suggests, you’re in Minnesota, you actually got to vote before the nominee became ‘presumptive’.

    I’m in New Mexico. Yeah, I voted before Clinton was declared the presumptive nominee, but it was 24 hours before my state’s polls closed. That’s just how it works.

  61. BeccaM says:

    She’s still the presumptive nominee at this point. Same as Obama was on June 3, 2008 when he crossed the exact same threshold.

  62. Nelson Kerr says:

    The Superdelegates have already said who they are voting for, it is all over but the whining, and more voters have voted for Hilary than Bernie, It is over but for the whiging.

  63. timncguy says:

    It’s more likely that Clinton’s supporters will stay home tomorrow since they will think she already has it won. Sanders supporters will still go out to vote tomorrow to make a point.

  64. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Maybe they are trying to make the news.

  65. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Listen, I do respect the English language. I taught it for many years. I feel disenfranchised, because there is no reason for me to vote tomorrow. At least, there is no reason for me to vote for a presidential candidate. We are allowing the media to make big decisions for us. They knew what they were doing. They hope that Bernie’s voters will just stay home and not bother to vote. Thus giving Hillary more pledged delegates then she would have garnered otherwise. The media is acting like superdelegates.

  66. Phil in FLL says:

    Not if you voted in the primaries. The dictionary definition of “disenfranchise” is “deprive someone of the right to vote.” How are you using the word? May we have some respect for our common English language, please?

  67. Phil in FLL says:

    Your complaint is with Associated Press, and you should send your corrections to them. I think that the folks at Associated Press are not engaged in a satanic conspiracy, but rather they are engaged in journalism—reporting the news.

  68. Phil in FLL says:

    Elected officials in the executive branch (e.g., presidents, governors and mayors) are always influenced by the forces within their own political party rather than other political parties. Therefore, Hillary would be influenced by forces from Democratic congressmen and senators, and Trump would be influenced by forces from Republican congressman and senators. That is how politics has always worked.

    Ahem. I said “Ahem.” ’Nuf said. (Unless, of course, you think the Republican/Tea Party crowd is way cool.)

  69. Webster says:


  70. revbones says:

    Breaking News: John Arvoisis completes his selling-out by not only posting AP lie, but rewording it to include “wins”. Congrats John – you’re no better than Trump with all his lies now.

  71. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    How wonderful. I’ve been disenfranchised.

  72. S. Parilla says:

    On her worst day she’ll be a better president than Donald Trump would be on his best.

  73. Blogvader says:

    I truly hope she’ll be a better president than I expect she’ll be if she wins in November. .

© 2021 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS